![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Here is the right equation (I think). The cost of calling is 2:
A (3 b + 3 c) - 36 * 2 = 0
David,
I don't think you can calculate it as simply as this. You must factor in the possibility that someone has or makes concealed trips or (more likely) two pair, or four to a flush. It depends a lot on your opponents as well. It's definitely a play to consider though. You should be more inclined to call with a two flush and/or another high card or two. And if you have the highest or second-highest upcard, a raise is worth thinking about and might be better.
If I hit the Ace in this spot I quite like to check-raise on 4th, I have had some good things happen lately when I do this.
Andy.
Thank you for your response.
First, you will not have the highest up-card since the high card brings it in. But i do agree that a raise is correct sometimes.
I meant to say that your average winnings will be higher than the pot. So, yes, my calculation includes those times you lose the pot (to hidden trips and other hands).
/D
Here's a hand I played tonight in a $30-$60 stud game at The Bellagio. (The ante is $5 and the bring-in is $10.)
The game was four handed. A deuce of spades was the bring-in. A Qd raised. I was next with a 6h and had 5h5c in the hole. I reraised. The last player on my left with the 5s up called the two bets cold. The bring-in folded. The player with the Qd up raised again. Both of us called.
On fourth street, the player on my left caught the remaining 5 to pair his door card. He bet $60. The player with the Qd caught a blank and called. I caught the Ah (which gave me a three flush to go along with my pair of fives) and raised. The player with the paired door card raised again. The original raiser with the Qd folded, and I called.
On fifth street my opponent caught a king and I caught a worthless card. He bet and I called.
On sixth street my opponent caught another king (giving him two pair, kings and fives on board) and bet. I caught another worthless card and raised.
On the river my opponent checked, I bet, and he folded.
All comments are welcome.
He calls the raise on 6th; doesn't this almost force him to call on 7th irregardless of his river card?
Pot laying me 19-1 against a tough opponent I'd've called without even looking at my final card, but I've got no experience at higher level Stud.
I guess this question is for the experts, but if Bill is right is there any reason someone should correctly fold with such good odds, assuming that the odds are correct? The mere fact that I am up against a good player who might be making a move on the hand alone makes this worth a call. Personally, and keep in mind that I have no experience at high limit stud, I would have bet/raised on the end if I were Mason's opponent.
Aside from having marked cards, there is really no way for the 2P to KNOW he is beaten so that it is correct to fold,or at least that is how I look at it, from the perspective of a 5-10 player.
thats a tough one for the floorman as its not a clear decision. next time say ill take the seat and give him 15 minutes to return then its my seat. but you did right by crying loud enough and the sqweaky wheel got the grease.
The house made a couple of errors. First, the board should not affect whether a player gets an absent button, only whether and when the player gets picked up. Second, the seat should be given to a player ready to play immediately, although drawing cards for the absentees seems reasonable to determine the reat of the order.
Aggressive play is definitely the best way to play, and check-raising should be done not infrequently. Although every once ina while it can get you into trouble (see my post regarding high pairs that do not improve) the benefits far outweigh the negatives. Just in my last session I noticed that the pots I won were frequently 50% higher than other pots, due to aggressive betting.
As a 5-10 player, most of the players are terrible. I played with one guy who checked 3 k's on three streets b/c he was afraid of being beaten!! I would love to have this guy at every game I played.
Pat
"Many players will slow down with high pairs when they don't improve. This is generally a mistake, but is a common one. His range of possible hands for you includes an unimproved 3-flush, a small pair-high kicker, or a high pocket pair.
In a recent trip to AC, I observed that the tight players often won. When they go in, your best option is to fold. I found myself sqeaking out wins with high two pairs against the overly agressive players, but also losing to them sometimes just because they would call all the way to the river or would sometimes would actually have a hand.
Check raising is not as effective as re-raising, which can stop the loose players in their tracks; but if they bet into you, you're probably in trouble.
In reality, there is usually a mix of players at the table. What I found most frustrating was watching the money go back and forth between the two or three loose players while I keep getting weak starting hands. I couldn't go in with moderate hands, because the betting was two much and multi-way pots were common. I found myself hoping the bad players would win the tight player's money and give me a chance to get their money, but I would also sometimes lose to the loose players when they made their hands.
One may be able to bet the tight players out of the hand, but if they stay in, fold. Against the loose players, you could play a high pair, but a little less then half the time, you are going to be beaten on or near the river or when they actually do have something. So you have be sensitive to reading those loose players who will bet into you if they have something (or if they don't). If there is more then one of them, you are going to be in a multi-way pot. You can only hope that when you get a good hand they will pay you off, that you will get a little lucky with your draw hands even when you are playing the odds, and that you will be able to tell when you are up against a real hand.
Patience is a real asset. If you find yourself at a table with passive players, consider yourself lucky. Take advantage. If you find yourself against tight players, do bet; but be careful when they call, bet, or re-raise. If you find yourself against loose players, try to get into the pots with them, but not if another tight player is in it, too, and only with hands that can bet them.
When you do isolate those loose players, you have to have a high pair, or sometimes a low pair with a high kicker. It's going to cost you too much money to go in against them with marginal hands. They will go to the river often no matter how you bet.
You may find yourself sitting there playing tight, because the loose players are forcing the action and the tight players are coming in with strong hands. Bluffing or semi-bluffing is tough, because when the tight players call, you're in trouble; and the loose players often refuse to fold. Your stuck playing tight, trying to isolate the loose players, and when you can't, folding early.
Please feel free to comment.
in tight games raise enough so you are showing a profit on steals. if the games are loose always fold. under the gun is tough to steal from unless the game is very tight or the players are so stupid to say to themselves " why would anyone raise under the gun without kings". when im last i always raise the bringin unless he always calls then i play accordingly.
All of you say raise with that hand when you act last on third street. Why?
The way I see it, your hand is weak and needs improvement. Even if it does improve, you may not want players committed to the pot. Your goal may be to get in cheaply, and that is exactly what you can do acting last. If you don't improve by fourth street, which is likely, you will have to fold. So why throw in the extra bet?
because many or most times you win the antes when last and no one is in yet, and you raise. if you give the low card a free one you are asking for trouble.
Raising when only you and the bring-in are left puts the pressure on the bring-in. He has a choice to make. If he feels he has to "protect" his initial investiment, then great--I hope he calls all the time. If he raises me back, I have the opportunity to fold if I think he is holding good cards. Him being first with the lowest card showing is a distinct disadvantage, and one should exploit it as long as it shows a profit.
3rd street steals usually give you pot odds of 4-3, so if you win 50%, you will show a profit. Remember you have the same chance of improvement as he does, and now he has to make the decisions. Suppose he calls. If you raise and match your door card (6%) you win right there.
"Q2: Suppose you are in seat 8 and are heads-up with bring in; should you raise 100% of the time?"
I understand raising when you are in seat 2. That's where I got confused. In seat 8, if others come in ahead of you, would you still raise? That is the situation I was thinking of when I wrote the post. Sorry for the confusion.
6 handed 30-60 stud game...
3rd street:
Seat 1 brings it in with the 2h, seat 3 (fairly good player) raises with the 6h, I reraise with (5dAd)5c 6c, 6s, 9s fold, seat 3 reraises, I call. Heads up.
Q1: What kind of hand do you give him here?
4th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8d, I have (5dAd)5cQd. I check, he bets, I call.
5th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8dJc, I have (5dAd)5cQd7s. I check and he checks behind me.
Q2: What kind of hand do you give him here, and what does he think I have at this point?
6th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8dJc8h, I have (5dAd)5cQd7sTd. He bets.
Q3: Do you raise, call, or fold here?
I chose to call.
7th street:
He bets.
Q4:
If you catch a blank, what is your move? If you catch 2 pair smaller than 8's up, what is your move? If you catch 2 pair larger than 8's up, what is your move? If you catch trips, what is your move? If you catch a flush, what is your move? Why?
Q1: With only the two of you left in the hand, he almost certainly has a high pocket pair. Your raise looks like an isolation raise, but you could easily have a pocket pair and a good player would be unlikely to reraise you with a 3-flush here.
Q2: Many players will slow down with high pairs when they don't improve. This is generally a mistake, but is a common one. His range of possible hands for you includes an unimproved 3-flush, a small pair-high kicker, or a high pocket pair.
Q3: You definitely don't fold with a live flush draw in this size pot. A five or ace will almost certainly win the pot for you, and a queen might. There's no reason to raise here, since he isn't folding now or on the river when you have that board and he likely has a high two pair. Your equity, while smaller than 50%, is clearly enough to call.
Q4: I wouldn't bluff raise here unless I had a very good read on him. Also, consider that given the action in the hand anything less than kings up is unlikely, and that a full house is very possible. Queens up and lower can safely go in the muck. With aces up, three fives, or a flush, you make the decision based on his river play. If he filled, would he check and go for two bets? He might try and induce a bluff with two pair or a full.
"Many players will slow down with high pairs when they don't improve. This is generally a mistake, but is a common one. His range of possible hands for you includes an unimproved 3-flush, a small pair-high kicker, or a high pocket pair."
Betting a high pair can be costly, even heads up, particularly when you know the other player is going to call you to the river no matter what. A good approach may be to bet until your opponent's board improves or if you read a real hand behind his board.
"Q2: Many players will slow down with high pairs when they don't improve. This is generally a mistake, but is a common one. His range of possible hands for you includes an unimproved 3-flush, a small pair-high kicker, or a high pocket pair."
It's only a mistake when you're not yet heads up. The only reason I see to keep raising is to get head up. Once you get heads up, there is little reason to raise, particularly if you know the guy if going to call you to the river. Yes, you have the odds in this situation, and that may be a reason to continue betting; but if you read that he's already hit his hand , even even head up, you should fold. One way to tell if he's hit his hand or not is to check and see if he bets.
6 handed 30-60 stud game...
3rd street:
Seat 1 brings it in with the 2h, seat 3 (fairly good player) raises with the 6h, I reraise with (5dAd)5c 6c, 6s, 9s fold, seat 3 reraises, I call. Heads up.
Q1: What kind of hand do you give him here?
**Unless you two are at war in the game, I give him a buried pair. With dead six, he probably wont reraise with 6's or 3 flush (20% for this vs 80% for high pair, in my estimation.
4th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8d, I have (5dAd)5cQd. I check, he bets, I call.
5th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8dJc, I have (5dAd)5cQd7s. I check and he checks behind me.
Q2: What kind of hand do you give him here, and what does he think I have at this point? **If he is a slightly weak player, I give him 8's or 9's in the hole 6th street:
Seat 3 has (xx)6h8dJc8h, I have (5dAd)5cQd7sTd. He bets.
Q3: Do you raise, call, or fold here?
Call. You are beat. He will call on end.
I chose to call.
7th street:
He bets.
Q4:
If you catch a blank, what is your move? If you catch 2 pair smaller than 8's up, what is your move? If you catch 2 pair larger than 8's up, what is your move? If you catch trips, what is your move? If you catch a flush, what is your move? Why?
**This is just a gut reaction, but I would call with any hand that beats 8's but not raise with any hand less than trips or aces/queens up. This really depends on the opponent and how he reads you. He will bet any two pair on the end figuring you might call because he checked on 5th. I would not raise without improvement as he will not fold two pair and might even call with just the 8's. It really depends on the player. I know a lot of players that if they bet in this spot I don't even have to look at my river unless I flush and then have to pray opponent flushed and will just call. But most are not like that. Sight unseen, raise with queens or aces up or better, call if beat 8's, fold otherwise.
wgaf
Without looking below
Q1:3rd st:I give him a pocket pair here >9, and it does not necessarily A or K since the board is small. I do not think he has a 3 flush, but might have a pair with 2 suited and a possibly a pair with a gap.
Q2:Again, a pair or possibly a gap straight It’s a tough call here. I definitely would not raise here. he has too many possibilities and should reraise if he is a good player. Your board shows “nothing scary”. If you play here I think you have to go the end. Lets say I call.
Q3:Pretty obvious here:
Q4:blank = check/fold
small pair = check/fold
large pair or better=check/call
no raise here because of the possibility of a full house. I’ll take the 1 bet win rather than risk 3 bets.
On 6th street I had already thought about what I would do depending on what card I caught on the river. At this point, it seemed to me that he either had just the pair of 8's (bluffing with the best hand, since I cannot even beat the hand he thinks he's bluffing with), or a monster hand, such as jacks full. Since my board wasn't scary, the check on 5th street just wasn't consistent with him having just a pair at that point, in my opinion.
My decision was to bluff raise him if I didn't catch another pair, and call with any other hand, up to and including a flush. I notice that this didn't coincide with anyone else's train of thought on this problem, which was the main reason I posted this in the first place.
Anyway, I caught a blank on the river, and raised, and he thought a few seconds and mucked. I'm guessing he had just the 8's, which was what I had thought.
I meant to say that I'd just call with a hand up to and including trips, but raise with a flush, as him having a flush draw at this point was fairly likely, and if we both hit, I likely have him beat...
" but raise with a flush, as him having a flush draw at this point was fairly likely, and if we both hit, I likely have him beat... "
So he was on a flush draw more than likely no hidden pair and reraising with a three flush does not seem unlikely to me as some have stated. He was trying to win it on 4th and was probably going to fold on 6th but hit a pair plus a heart and tried to win it again. Reraising was perfect in this situation especially when he doesn't improve. Just for curiosity what was your 7th card??
Paul
My guess was he had 2 high flush cards in the hole as well, therefore explaining his excitement over his 6th street card.
My river was a 2.
Sounds like you had a better read on him then your post implyed. Likely he had an unimproved pair and read you for two pair or better. If he had paired on the river, he would have called.
I agree he would have called if he had paired. He seemed to want to call even without improving, as it took him a bit of time to fold his hand.
I purposely made it sound like I didn't read my opponent well so that it wouldn't influence other's opinions about what he had. I was more interested in what others thought of the situation.
Your opponent is obviously a poor player since with the dead 6 up, he has to know that you must go to the river with him with any pair unless he pairs the board. With a really dead door, it's foolish to triple bet with a three flush because you can't hit open 6's to win and because your opponent with a pair is encouraged that you won't make two pair so he will go to the end with you.
I agree, he must be a very weak player. Why can't I get to play against this guy? Who knows, maybe I have...
I'm sure you played with a lot worse.
I think you played dangerous ...baaa
I think you played dangerous ...baaa
55% of the time you have 2pair after the the river so you played against the odds but....you won
hehe if you catch blank you should fold knowing that he has a pair in 8s and you in 5s
You should read a book of 7card stud
1) Not only is reraising Ok it is probably the best play, and calling is clearly incorrect. You want to play against 1 other player besides the K or heads up.
2)with limpers it is a definite raise if you believe that theraise will knock some of them out. If you can only play multiway,you are better off folding or limping for one card at most. You do not want to play this hand mutiway, especially because someone may be limping in with just an A or AKx.
3) With the A up I would definitely reraise. Not only will you likely knock out everyone but the K, and possibly the K also if you read the "castration hand" posts, you also set up a good semibluff. If you catch a scary card on 4th st. or if you pair your board you will likely get the K to fold.
Depending on the up cards, my position, how many callers and the nature of the game/players, I most likely raise if I had an Ace showing and a pocket pair. I have about a 12% chance of winning on 4th street if I catch a scary card (Ace) or my pair card (4). If I get suited, that helps.
I certainly would NOT raise if there were players in before me, and would consider folding the A,4,4 depending on what the board looked like. I figure I am beat on 3rd street and have only 5 outs. I would stay if I can get in cheaply (like 1 complete bet from 3-10), but not a raise from 10 to 20.
It seems to me that Pineapple would be alluring to the novice or recreational poker player because so many more hands can seem playable. For instance, compared to Hold'em, one starts with a pair about twice as often. I've never played pineapple except in home games, but I'm tempted to don gladiator garb and join the fray at the nearby card club. I'm harboring a suspicion that at the entry levels (3-6, 6-12) pineapple could prove to be more profitable than Hold'em for the disciplined tight-truculent player. Anyone care to dispute or corroborate?
That pineapple is one crazy game.
I think Pineapple should be played in the home, on holidays, with the kids, the cousins etc and certainly not in a casino. It is fun, but not a casino game. i canpicture the confusion now. Holdem and Stud cause novices problems. Ever sit at an Omaha table with 2 novices? get the picture?
When I used the term "novices," I meant those people new to casino poker. Plenty of people (millions?) play home poker who have never visited a poker parlor or casino poker room. They head to the blackjack or craps tables or to the slots instead. The reason? They are looking for ACTION; it's like preferring football and basketball to baseball. I admit that casino Omaha is too intimidating to the majority of poker players no matter what, but most home games already incorporate Pineapple into the mix and the rules are almost identical to Hold'em, simple enough to play if difficult to master. Aren't more people likely to see the flop in Pineapple than in Hold'em? Consequently, doesn't the ACTION quotient get juiced up? In turn enticing more gamblers to the tables? In Hold'em, junk hands are commonest. As for the blinds, there one is afforded lousy position with inferior cards most of the time. Hardly the most appetizing of situations. Comparatively, in Pineapple, isn't there more of an opportunity for otherwise marginal hands to become playable in the blinds?
Mark Harris said:
"I think Pineapple should be played in the home."
Close, Marc. It should be played in *a* home.
No, what I said is that Pineapple is already being played in home poker games. I believe one of the other posters opined that that's where it belongs. Since I've never tried casino Pineapple, I'm not biased one way or the other. I'm just wondering what game at the low levels of 3-6, 4-8, 5-10 affords the very good player with a limited bankroll the best advantage over the long haul assuming s/he can adapt optimally to the specific nuances incumbent to each game. Maybe it's Omaha, maybe it's Hold'em, maybe it's Simon Says.
I am in a very good 4-8 Omaha-8 game - in a full 9-handed game 6+ players see most flops. The game last night went short, and for more than an hour we were 5-6 handed. I have been having nice success just following the directions in HLSPFAP, starting with A2 and A3 hands and 4-card highs and a few additional hands, only drawing to the nuts, etc.
For 5-6 handed, I did not know how to adjust! I have not seen this discussed in books, articles, or this forum. It has certainly been heavily discussed for Hold'em, up to the point where heads-up you want to play 50% or more of your hands.
There must be a gradual loosening-up of both starting hand standards and post-flop standards to proceed, as the game gets shorter. Does anyone have a system? As I said, this would be for a very loose game - even at 6-handed, 4 players saw many flops.
Thanks ... Dick
Reminder! Everyone should send in their picture to my gallery of 2+2 posters, which is at Dick's Poker Page. E-mail to me or send a regular photo to my snail mail address found at my contacts page. ...Dick
I'm just an O8 novice, but I suspect that in a 6-handed game with 4 people seeing most flops, you don't really need to alter your standards too much, since the pots are still multiway. If a pot ends up being heads up though, the usual advice about heads up play from HLSPFAP applies.
The main reason you can loosen up in a shorthanded hold'em game is because shorthanded hold'em tends to be a semi-bluffing and bluffing game, and your main objective when opening the pot is to steal the blinds or get heads up with a blind. But in the shorthanded O8 game you describe, people are playing many hands and probably chasing a lot, so you won't be able to steal any pots. And, there are enough people contesting each pot that you can't play non-nut draws safely.
-Sean
I'm no O-8 expert, but I cut my poker teeth on Omaha high. I'd play my high hands aggressively and abandon my low draws early if there aren't enough callers to justify a low draw. Some people argue that raising pre-flop in O-8 merely increases your variance and gives others the odds to draw out on you. I think that in short-handed O-8, you have to raise pre-flop with big high hands to exploit your pre-flop advantage. For instance, I'd raise preflop with KKxx in a short-handed O-8 game, whereas I might muck it in a full game if the xx didn't coordinate with solid lows, straights, or 2-flushes.
The fewer players pre-flop, the less likely that someone will make a low even if the board ultimately comes with a possible low. I'd advocate punishing the low draws with your solid high cards pre-flop and on the flop. I'd also recommend more value betting of the river with non-nut hands if you have reason to suspect you are leading. For instance, be more inclined to bet non-nut flushes with an un-paired board, especially when it's checked to you in late position. Likewise, consider betting your trips on the end when the board is paired and you think you're in the lead. The more short-handed the game, the less likely the nuts are out. If your opponents have properly adjusted to the short handed aspect of the game, you may need to make more marginal calls on the river as well.
till you get better play tight. but as the games get shorter loosen up a little on your opening hands. one thing you will want to do is play more ace three and ace four hands with another high low card as you will make weak lows and aces up for high and scoop some headup pots that you would never be in when the game is full. when shorthanded many hands will be won with very poor lows. the big thing is to see what your oppoments are opening with, and if they have good hands dont play behind them without good stuff.
In the Omaha-8 game I play in, nobody knows proper starting hand selection. Nobody. But last night, a young guy sat down next to me, and he was bragging to his friend across the table about how he only played quality hands. I just kept my mouth shut. Sure enough, he was folding often enough that I thought maybe he really was following the same principles that I was. He folded and folded, and then finally he was in a hand. While playing the hand, he continued to tell his friend what a great starting hand he had, blah blah blah. Well, at the end, the board had an A 3 plus at least one other low card, and he very proudly said, "Now that's a quality hand!" as he turned over his
Dick
So what hands do you think he was folding?
Please, if you see him again, tell him I'm sending a limo from Los Angeles...if he'll just bring money.
Well ... Remember I said he was the tightest. You would like the rest of the players in this game even better. Just send a van that seats 8.
On second thought, I want them to stay here.
Dick
Well maybe he's laughing too. You don't give details like what position he was in, or what it cost him to enter the pot with this bunch of loose fish, or exactly what cards flopped. But he did show down the nut hand.
He was probably folding stuff like AsKsAcQc. After all, you can't make a low. :)
-SmoothB-
I've not read any O-8 literature yet. I just had my first significant exposure to O-8 this week. What is the consensus as to the best possible starting hand in O-8 and why? Thanks.
This is my opinion based on nothing more than intuition and experience, but I'd have to go with AhAc2c3h, with other suits, of course, being equivalent. In Omaha/8 it is very important that you have the nuts or be drawing to the nuts. This hand gives you the nut low draw with a redraw in case an ace or deuce comes. You have two ace-high flush possibilites. And the pair of aces can give you the top set or the top full house. We got into this discussion at a stud/8 table a couple of weeks ago, and a knowledgeable player said that he'd rather have AhAcKc2h, but I think having the low redraw is more important than the slightly improved high possibilities.
Having counterfeit protection for your low draw is way more important than having a slightly improved high draw. It's not like AK can make all that many straights in the first place, (only with exactly QJT) and you have no need to make top two since you'll have top set at the same time. But, if you hold an uncounterfeitable low on the turn, you can "go to war" since you know there's no way you can lose whatever portion of the pot you've already won, and if you're currently quartered and uncounterfeitable, the card that counterfeits the other low player might give you the entire low half.
The Shane Smith Omaha book implied that AK23 double suited was the best starting hand, but I think that's completely erroneous. Why would I want to exchange an nut flush draw and a chance at top set for a second nut flush draw and a chance at top two or a 1-way broadway?
-Sean
In pot-limit or a tight or shorthanded limit game, I'd take AA23 double suited.
Someone suggested that in loose, full limit games, A2KK double suited might be the best hand of all. In showdowns against a large field it doesn't win as often as AA23 double suited, but it has a better chance to scoop a large multiway pot, and the pots it wins with a set should be larger since an ace on board tends to kill the action. Also, there are three aces out instead of two, so there's more of a chance for someone to make a second-best low hand, or to be quartered and give you action with many others trapped in the middle.
I'm looking for answers to a few questions pertaining to a recent O-8 hand. This was a mid-week 6-12 game with a half kill. The stakes go to 10-20 when the kill is on. 3rd raise is a cap in this casino.
I'm in the Small blind and I've posted the $10 kill.
BB is an aggressive player who raises pre-flop fairly often. He'll raise pre-flop with any AAxx, any A2xx, and any high 4-straight. His worst hand shown with a pre-flop raise was 9JQK.
UTG is young Hold-em player who has played fairly little Omaha. He has recently scooped a couple nice pots and has $400 in profit in front of him.
5th seat is passive, moderately selective, only raises with the current nuts.
7th seat is an expert whom I've seen play O-8, HE, and stud. He knows all the games well, bets with strong hands, raises with strong draws and proper odds, and at times will bluff the end if heads-up and a chance to steal or push off a weak high hand.
At any rate, I have A337 with A3 hearts in SB.
Pre-flop, 6 people total have limped, I check, and BB raises. Everyone calls. 7 way action. Pot=$140.
The flop comes 227 rainbow.
I check. BB bets. UTG calls, 5-seat calls, 7-seat raises. I call, BB calls, UTG and 5-seat calls. The pot is now $240.
The turn card is a Q. The board is now 227Q.
Both blinds check the turn. UTG bets $20. 5-seat calls. 7 seat raises. I reluctantly cold call $40 with my nut low draw. I rationalize that my holding of A33 reduces the chance of another A3 being out. BB folds. UTG re-raises. 5-seat calls. 7-seat caps. I call. UTG and 5 seat call. The pot is now $560.
The river comes 4. Final board is 227Q4.
I bet. UTG raises. 5-seat calls. 7-seat re-raises. I cap. Total of 4 callers after river. Total pot $880.
I show nut low. UTG shows queens full. 5-seat folds. As expected, 7-seat shows quad 2's.
I took down $440, of which $240 was profit.
My questions are:
1). Should I have folded to two bets on the flop?
2). Should I have folded to two bets on the turn? Once I called the two bets on the turn, I knew that I'd have to call any further bets to see the river, and I had a very good idea that UTG had Queens full and 7-seat had quads, so the pot could easily be capped on the turn.
3). Part of my rationale for withstanding the aggression on the turn was that I had two 3's. I knew that if I filled on the river, I would still lose. But, I felt that if I hit the low draw, I would be less likely to be quartered. Is there a way to mathematically reduce the likelihood from average that one of my opponents holds another A3? In other words, (disregarding the betting sequence on this hand), what percentage of the time in a 10 handed game will at least one other pre-flop player have A3 when I hold A33? How does this compare to the likelihood of someone else holding an A3 when I only have one A and one 3?
Thanks in advance for responses.
I don't know the answers to numbers one and two. I think you played fine. I would have played it just as you did.
3. What percentage of the time in a 10 handed game will at least one other pre-flop player have A3 when I hold A33X?
Approximately 24 per cent of the time.
What percentage of the time in a 10 handed game will at least one other pre-flop player have A3 when I hold A3XX?
Approximately 34 per cent of the time.
There is a more precise way to do the problem you posed than the way I did it. The results above are only approximate. But that may do well enough to give you an idea.
Buzz
(1) You have 16 outs for your low. Your half of the pot is more than big enough to justify a call.
(2) See (1).
(3) Not often enough to worry about it.
I have recently been playing more 5-10-20 stud, with a one dollar ante and two dollar bring in. I was wondering if anyone had any general principles on how the river should be played in this game. For instance, I have been checking two pair on the river to drawing hands and even occasionally what I perceive to be a lower two pair. In the fifty hours, I have spent at the table, I have yet to see a bluff raise on the river, but everyone and there brother is willing to bluff the original twenty. Based on this logic, it would seem that the most profitable way to play the river (in principle) would be to bet all two pairs that I felt were superior to my opponents going in and fold to any raises if I do not improve on the river. Also, this prevents people from putting me in the predicament of calling twenty on the river with two pair. I still feel that I should check to all flush and straight draws unless I fill up with two pair since if they miss they will not call the twenty anyway. Is this logic correct? Also, what if someone is capable of bluff-raising the river, then I am offering two-one on unimproved rivers.
I think your logic is sound. The triple increase in betting does make it more difficult to call on the river, and does make bluffing more effective. Certainly calling with two pair is the right thing to do most of the time even if the pot odds are less advantages. The cost of being reraised, however, is doubled.
A semi-bluff against an opponent capable of folding a strong hand is possible if you have been representing trips all along, but for someone to call such a hand to the river probably indicates that they have at last a good drawing hand or better. On the other hand, a bet on the end if you think you have the best hand, depending on the pot odds, can be profitable. This game certainly encourages betting on the end either as a bluff or for value.
How you read the hand is probably the most important consideration. Automatically calling is more difficult; but, as with all other stud games, calling with a high two pair on the end is usually correct. Betting it,however, can be costly as it is unlikely someone would call if they can't beat your two pair but are likely to raise if they can.
Simple basics, but it's a start.
I sat in a 5 and 10 7 stud game last night and was informed that the rest of the players had agreed to make it a 5-10-15, with 15 on 6th and 7th streets.
I played for a few hours, broke even, saw some terrible play by some, and good play by a couple of others
My question is, what changes do you make when the betting changes like this?
My thinking was to go in with a few slightly worse starting hands than usual due to the higher back end profit if they came through, and to be a bit more inclined to just call early on to get to 6th street.
Any advice is welcome.
Mason,
First I'd like to compliment you on the work you've done with the 7CSFAP 21 century edition it has helped me a great deal in a 15-30 stud game that I play in reguarly. My question is about about overcalling. I was playing in a hand recently that was 3 handed after 3rd street. The first player raised coming in with the Qh and was called by a 9 I called out of the bring in with Ad Qd 3d. On fourt street I made open 3's and bet 30. QhJh called the 30 and 97 offsuit raised it to 60. I called because I felt the player behind me would call also. Then on fifth the QhJh caught the 3 of clubs and the 97 caught an 8. I caught a Queen and checked. The first player checked and the second player checked. This was very confusing to me. On sixth street the QhJh3c caught a heart and bet after I checked. 9786 called. I called. The river brought no inprovement and I was prepared to check and see what happens. The three hearts bet and were instantly called by 9768. I pondered and folded. Thinking well the Q's are dead and the 3's are dead so QhJh3c6h must have a flush or be bluffing but since what I belive to be a middle straight called looking at my paird board how can I then over call with Q's up. The initial better had a pair of 7's and the caller had 8's my heart sank. I normally don't play this weak but the second player was new to me and I wasn't sure what he was capable of. I was wondering if you had any advice on this had or overcalling in general.
On a differnt note I was playing in the game with Ray Michael B. but everybody calls him 'Doc' he said he was a fried of yours. If this is true what a small world the poker comunity is.
Good Luck and Nice play in the 30-60 game 5's
Paul:
You certainly have a confusing hand. But one thing stands out, there was no bet on fifth street. In stud this can mean many things, but it increases the possiblity of weakness and it can encourage someone to go ahead and bluff on either sixt street, the river, or both. (You can be fairly sure that the player with the 987 up doesn not have a staight on fifth street).
Because of that, I suspect that you should have called on the river even though it does seem given their boards that you are most likely beat. Of course, this is easy to say after the fact. I don't know if I would have made that call in the heat of battle.
Ray Michael B. is a friend of mine. He's also a doctor and will play poker at virtually any limit (including some very big games with the toughest players in the world.) He is also the author of our book PokerFarce and PokerTruth.
I would have bet once I paired Queens and threes. If I then got re-raised, I would have thought about folding -- always a tough thing to do. If I got called, I would have worried that the someone had already drawn a straight or had at least of good straight draw. On sixth street, we know the 9786 had a good straight draw, but if I didn't get raised on fifth street, I would bet again. If I got re-raised, I would have to do some calculating knowing that I'm probably going to have to call a bet on the river against a possible straight. Now, having increased the pot, I'm obligated to call on the river, but I wouldn't bet into a four straight on the river
What betting does for you is that it may force at least one of the drawing hands to fold, which gets you heads up thereby increasing your odds. The draw back is that someone is slow playing something, like trips or a pair of aces -- or a straight. If they already had it, however, I would expect a re-raise. Another draw back is the river, which is a killer.
I'm a little surprised that Mason Malmuth didn't mention all of the above. Having read 7CSAP, I would think that the above is the suggested play, even if queens up is significantly weaker than Aces up or Kings up. I would like to ask why he did mention the above, because I want to know if my approach is wrong.
Rockhard
A few points.
You definitely should have bet on 5th street. The river call is tricky since you have to have a good read on the players. Given the way the hand was played, you are getting around 11-1 on your money. Again, it depends. Most players won't try to bluff an open pair and a 4 straight on the board so folding is not such a bad play. You are in a tough spot. The key is really the lead better coupled with 4 straight making hand on the river. Probably a call but difficult, I don't think it's major either way. Just that you are so amazed that you were not beat indicates you thought you were more than 11-1 dog so it indicates you are thinking properly given your analysis of the hand. Betting 5th and 6th doesn't always stop bluffers. I had a hand in a very high game where I raised with hidden aces on 6th vs. an open pair so I would not have to call a possible river bluff and the opponent tried to bluff me anyway. Being he was a maniac and I am stubborn, I called anyway. The point is that even agressive betting doesn't always deter bluffs (but often does).
Sorry, it's late and I am rambling.
The way I understand the hand is that on fourth street after you paired your door card you were called and raised and the raiser only hand 97 showing. You have to think about what he would raise with. A set is now a distinct possibility since you are represnting a set of treys, and this should slow you down on fifth street.
The problem with stud is that if you bet and are raised again on fifth street you may still want to continue. These folds are generally more correct at hold 'em. In addition, by betting on fifth street, what will you accomplish? It doesn't look like anyone will fold even if your hand is best.
Good analysis. Another interesting thought about this hand that has not been mentioned is folding on 4th street after being raised and called. The possibility of a set in the 9-7 hand makes our hand in question even less valuable. That may have been the time to fold.
.
I don't like a reraise on 4th because that just commits the 9-7 to the river (the more you raise, the larger the pot, the more people will call). You might knock out the QJ but that is far from certain. If QJ stays in, you are really in trouble and if not, you are making the pot more expensive for yourself. Either way, you are committing more money to a pot with an inferior hand. I guess I might be willing to accept a raise if I KNEW 100% that QJ would fold. Still, I hate the hand because it's not even a rational raise for 9-7 with nines up so I am really afraid of trips and I hate playing hands where the other player has a chance of trips, and trips higher than my pair.
Mason's comments are echoed here by me. The interesting play is the call with the pair of eights. I would probably bluff raise with his hand rather than call. Your laydown on the river reflects what I believe may be a basic flaw in your game. I may be wrong but it appears that you are more concerned with good laydows and saving a bet than winning. I haven't read 7SFAP 21 (MAson is to cheap to send me a copy) but I can tell you that edition one tells you to call the river if the pot is beat and your opponents board does not beat you. So much for new editions.
Vince
Thanks for everyones responce. I don't think its fair to say that I am more willing to save bets than win. I am totally willing to spend extra bets during a given hand and even without the best had in an atempt to knock other players out thus increasing my chances greatly. And I would make this call heads up every time. Just at the time it looked like a really tough call given that the 9786 hand called. Its hard to find knowledgable stud players and I enjoy these discussions I'll have more hands to talk about after this weekend.
The best of luck,
Paul
Two questions:
1) What is meant by a "wrap"?
2) Is there anyplace online I can find an outs sheet for Omaha (high only)?
Thanks!!
New Kid
A "wrap" is short for "wraparound straight draw," which is a straight draw in which where there are multiple cards that can make your hand. For example, on a board of Q96, if you hold JT87, any K, J, T, 8, 7, or 5 will give you a straight.
I don't know where to find an outs sheet for Omaha High.
-Sean
after making a living for a couple of years playing 7card hilo 8 or better $1 to $10 anytime here in n.c. they changed the format of the games in this area to all cards down and a forced bet of $2-4-6-8-10. and since the change i am not making any money. just cant seem to beat the game played this way. im even for the past 7 months and my br has gone away!!! anyone ever played the game this way? any help would be greatly appreciated.
I was recently playing in a 5-10 game with a whole table of passive players. On one hand I called the bring in of $2 with 88/9 on third street. A player with a Q up merely called. It later turned out that he had a pair of queens. He also was the high card on board.
I got an 8 on fourth street,and the queen got a 6. This is exactly why it is worthwhile to limp with weak players-sometimes you will catch the perfect card on fourth street and they will keep coming. Play proceedeed,and on sixth street I got the Fourth 8! The queen paired the queen on board, and obviously had three queens, with two on board.
After the river it turned out that not only did the queen have q's full of 6's, another limper had an Ace high flush. Needless to say I won a big pot,as there were still five callers on fifth street, even after I raised throughout.
Afterwards, I learned a valuable lesson, one that my opponents learned the hard way--Do NOT let people limp in with worse hands. If the Q had raised I would have folded, and the Ace high straight also should have raised on third. By letting me in they lost a huge pot to a big longshot.
The advice in 7CSFAP to frequently limp in just for the bring in worked out well here.
Pat D.
How often do you get into those types of games.
I was siting at a table at the Tropicana in AC a few weeks ago and found myself at a passive table. It was great. There were people waiting to get in on the board, but the dealer suddenly called out to one of his freinds who he saw standing around watching another game. He said: "Hey [name], you've got to get into this game." I became angry, because hey, the dealers job is not to turn his friend, who may be standing around, onto a good game. I complained. It turned out that I bested the new player on my right, but the table soon broke up, unfortunately but I guess inevitably. Still, I should have had it to myself and the random player waiting in line, not the dealers friend.
Rockhard
Pat,
Sit on your hands till 4th street type game.
paul
I go on tilt when I'm winning, when I'm losing, and when I'm bored. Help!
Try Masturbating.
CV
xxx
theres medication out there to mellow you out
jg
Read Zen and the Art of Poker
Thanks for the advice, and the laughs. I have read Zen and the Art of Poker. It was helpful. I think my big problem may be that I really didn't have as good a handle on starting hand requirements as I thought. I'll just keep playing and learning, disgarding the less useful advice and keeping the good advice.
Rockhard
hey rockie just one last thought if you dont have a library of poker ,then you definitely will tilt forever.
jg
"For instance, it would be crazy to play a pair of 5s in seven-card stud with the two other 5s exposed." Theory of Poker, pg 37, ¶ 1 (Exposed Cards)...........LOL
I recently purchased a software program and ran a simulation. I came to the tenative conclusion that there are only three, maybe four, profitable starting hands in 7CS:
(1) A high pair, queens are better preferably,
(2) A straight flush draw,
(3) A high flush draw, and possibly
(4) An ante-steal with with a high upcard.
The remaining hands should be thrown away regularly. Aces and Kings are big favorites. This throws some question on playing fast on third street as they prove so profitable. Not only could you be giving away your edge, causing players to fold might actually minimize your profits rather than maximize them. The interesting news is that most of the time people don't start with such high pairs. Of course, if they bet them they more likely have them but could just as well be bluffing as should you when you have the highest upcard. On the other hand, when you read someone to have a high pair in the hold, you are in trouble. Hidden high pairs can be slow played often for large profits.
So despite what 7CSAP says about strategy and good players being able to play marginal hands, if you just play those three types of hands, bluffed at the right times, and got out when you're in trouble, you should turn a profit; but if you insist on playing marginal hands, you're giving away your edge.
Comments?
Rockhard
I must say, there is a lot of truth in what you say especially in lower limit games. Given that Aces will win about 33% of the time, one can see how the lower cards decrease in value. I think one must add a straight draw if there are some overcards.
I am amazed at the people who play low pairs early when ther are overcards and those who play high cards unsuited and cold call a raise with players still to speak.
You wouldn't play 789 or 678 with all cards live if you could see the fourth card cheaply? Or what about a hand like 9A9 (split pair) against two players with upcards of 6 and Q with two other queens exposed?
Probably yes depending on the players. I would see a card with small/mid pair and top kicker for a complete bet against 2 players. I would most likely see a card with a straight draw if I had a high card. Against 2 players, the small straight is not giving me the correct odds. Even implied odds may not be enough if I think the 1 of the other players may fold early and if one has a drawing hand with a high pair.
Small straight draws are in the category of small pairs without a big kicker. To paraphrase what Bob Ciaffone once wrote in regards to a hold-em hand: "Look at what you are building." Someone else once wrote that when you play a 3-card straight at the beginning, one of your biggest outs is to make pairs if the straight doesn't build. Well, I'm not looking to make small pairs, and over the long run, unless you are a great player, you'll lose more money on small straights than you'll win with it.
But the thesis stated by rockhard is too simplistic. I would first question which software program used to come to this conclusion. Hands are played for a variety of reasons, the least of which is determined by considering the outcome against computer players. For example, if I think you'll lay down any sort of hand at a particular point in the play, I'll run a stone-cold bluff where I slowplay with nothing and check-raise you out on 5th or 6th street. All of the good stud players I know use the hands they are dealt to accomplish strategic objectives, the least of which is a straightforward call-bet-raise scenario where the "best" or "good" hand prevails. Toward that end, were you only to play the hands suggested, you would be easily defeated. For further proof of this, consider Sklansky's simplistic example (In Winning Poker, I believe), where a Razz player will only play A-2-3. A player so pigeonholed on starting hand requirements will be called by better players with weaker hands simply because they know what you have, when you improve, and when you don't. Their decisions are easy. I agree that there is no win in the above strategy except possibly in a very low-limit game with no ante.
Rockhard could not possibly play only those hands in real life and turn a profit. I do not know what simulator you used, but I can say that I think your analysis is wrong.
You do not consider whether there is an unraised pot, whether you can get in cheaply, whether you pick up a draw on later streets, whether you are in a steal position and numerous other profitable situations. You must remember that the value of ANY hand depends upon many factors.
For example, the quality of the players is probably the biggest flaw in your reasoning. Would you fold 4h4s/Ah ina weak game with an unraised pot? I would hope not since you might be able to raise and knock out many players,making your hand playable.Have you considered semibluffing,or the fact that your opponent may be limping in on third street with nothing? What about playing AhKh/9s for a raise when you can get it heads up or even steal?
You would deplete your bankroll quickly in any game above $3-$6, but more importantly, in any game you would not maximize your profit against bad players by playing your guidelines.
I think he has a point. I believe that you can turn a very small profit playing almost that tight. It really depends if the game has a calling station or 2 who do not quite realize that when the tight player plays past 4th st, he has the goods.
There are a limited number of situations where you can play marginal hands, but if you make a practice of it, you will lose. I wouldn't play the AhKh/9s except if I'm last in with only the bring in left. Of course, the board and the players matter. With a weak board, you can play medium pairs and perhaps the dreaded small pair with a two flush or straight. Generally, however, if you stick with the four (including the bluff/ante-steal) hands I suggest, plus the one I left out which is trips, you maximize your odds. You can mix things up with a bluff/ante-steal on third street, but be wary of callers.
My main point is that without strong starting hand requirements, you will probabaly lose money. Sometimes a small pair with a high kicker is worth a call, even a raise if the Kicker is up; but fundementally, against random hands played by a mix of competent players, only the four or five hands I mentioned make money. The program I used was Wilson's Turbo Seven-Card Stud for Windows.
I think there is a lot to what you say. The biggest decision one makes is on 3rd street. I usually only play low pairs and sometimes mid pairs when I am on a steal and I have a high up card especially if I see duplicates on board. I pick up a lot of antes. I am succesful about 70%. I can be bluffed and will toss the cards if I am reraised by a good player and have nothing
Because of the open board aspect of stud, hands cannot be so neatly quantified as proposed. The better players will make a lot of moves from any position on 3rd street, making you lay down a lot of otherwise playable hands. You give up a lot by not contending with hands that are the favorite (or small dog) heads-up, or even as dog in multi-player pots, that a robot says aren't long-term playable. The advice in 7CSFAP is a lot more on target, but much more difficult to put into practice, simply because it deals with the variables of a live game. The beauty of poker -- particularly 7-stud -- is that the game is about situations, not cards. I like Wilson's products (I even own one). However, the conclusion proposed here would only be valid if there weren't poker players who play the game as a duel where the goal is to outwit the other guy.
It's true that 7cs is a game of situations, but those situations where you play marginal hands are few. If you play too many of them, you will lose. Also, outwitting players is not as important as having good hands, knowing your odds, and playing accordingly. The exact wrong thing to do is to make a move on a good hand. Like Ratso says, know when you're beat and don't throw good money after bad.
Rich
Ratso,
if you are winning 70% on those bluffs i suspect its because most times even though you raise as a bluff its the best hand. id try and experiment on doing it alot more often in increments. and considering playing on when raised certainly with a medium pair and high upcard if its higher than the person who raised you. maybe even if its not sometimes.
"I usually only play low pairs and sometimes mid pairs when I am on a steal and I have a high up card especially if I see duplicates on board. I pick up a lot of antes"
Mistake.
Vince
What about ten dollar ante 40-80? What about when you have two jacks and no one remaining in the pot shows a card higher than a ten?
I have to play Jacks if no one raises especially if my Jacks are conceiled and live. Would also play for a complete bet even if my Jack was open. David, is this a trick question? I think Queens are more critical in Holdem. I think live cards are more important in stud
I think David's point, though far be it from me to assume I can speak for such an expert, is that what is considered a "payable" hand depends upon the game structure, what you believe your opponents have, how well your opponents play, and other variables which can change not only from game to game, but from hand to hand. Restricting one's self to a specific list of hands as starting requirements which applies to all situations is to give up an advantage in certain situations.
I agree, certainly, that the "game mix" often dictates play. But, there are some guidelines one must follow. Rockhard's guidelines are really (I think) guidelines.
When "guidelines" are too simplistic and and have too many exceptions, they become almost worthless.
Hi, I am a new player who has read most of the recommended books. I have been play on the web. for 50 hours and am have double by stake. so very new.. what seem as important as good cards and playing skills (hopefuly I play aggressive solid) is the "OUT'S" live card's and high kicker, the more out's a hand has the more often i win. flush draw flush large pr pr straight ect's. enjoy the day ron
David,
You actually answered a post with a title that emphatically states: "There are only three playable hands in Stud"? From an anonymous named Rockhard no less! What am I missing?
Vince
I agree that there are certain situations where you can play certain hands. The simulations simply says that some hand are unprofitable if played consistantly. Don't play jacks against queens, kings, or aces, for example. Also, if you can't get heads up with jacks, you should probably check and fold. Here are some questions that come to mind:
1. Should one probably only bet kings or aces all the way to the river? One could be up agianst pocket aces or better.
2. If you are up against a four flush on fourth street, and to a lesser degree a four straight, would you only want to bet if your heads up? In other words, do two drawing hands change your odds?
3. Even with Aces or Kings, when should you stop betting when you find you are not getting heads up?
Rockhard
Hi Rockhard, I don'tknow how you are running your sims but when I run 2K2 against xQQ the queens win more pots, but the money contest is about even, so how can what you say be correct? The answer is, that it cannot be, because you assert that the queens are profitable and a small pair and kicker is not.
(The stats show that the more opponents you have the better your small pair and kicker will do, so it's wrong to raise with them, as advised by several writers, but certainly right to call, as long as your kicker is not dominated.)
I don't know about the small straights: they are pretty marginal, but should be played sometimes to give your other hands credibility. In PL Stud I think your position re small straights is very valid, and many players quite rightly won't touch them, nor small flushes either, and won't play even large straights in a raised pot.
"(The stats show that the more opponents you have the better your small pair and kicker will do, so it's wrong to raise with them"
Of course if the computer freezes during the running of the sims, then you should fold. But if you play against them real human being types I would listen to those human being type writers that say raise and try to get the hand heads up. It's the best play.
Vince
Hi Vince, how goes it. Well, we've been here before, so you know the score: the suggestion that reraising to thin the field with 7K7 when a Q bets is pretty well disproved (IMO) by the fact that the hand does better in a three way hand against another overpair when the raiser actually has queens, and also because you generally have to improve to win even when your heads-up opponent hasn't got queens, because unimproved sevens just don't hold up very often. The hand is therefore essentially a drawing hand, and normal drawing rules apply: get in cheap and bet when you improve, because you are a favourite when you do, but a dog until then. But I guess that won't influence your opinion, and I must admit you are in some authoritative company: still there's no evidence to support your side, though there is considerable unanimity of opinion. Hey it's your money, so what the heck. I never play limit seven anyway so it costs me nothing either way. I certainly wouldn't normally reraise with 7K7 in HP or PL stud, and I hope you wouldn't either.
David Z.
Often one is confronted withthis type of decision:
Game is 10-20 7CS, 8 handed
You bring in with a (J,9)4. rainbow
4 callers, no raisers, no Aces/Kings.
Q1: 4th st, you pair your 4 - What do you do next? You are hig on board
Q2: What if you do not pair, but get an Ace? You are high on board.
Q3: How far can you push the hand without improvemnt if 1 or 2 people continue to limp along?
Q4: Suppose you bet $20 with the 4's or $10 with the Ace on 4th st. and you are now left heads-up against someone who just limped in and does not show a big pair. You figure him for a mid pair.
On 5th st. you have a choice to bet or check. Checking will show a weakness, but then again-you are.
When is a check the correct move?
Suppose you push the hand possibly representing Aces or trip 4's or 2 pair when in faty you have garbage. There is almost just enough money in the pot for him to call a $20 bet even if he is on a draw. You bet and he calls. You both catch nothing apparent and you are still high? I would tend to check on 6th street? In general, is this correct?
This happens a lot.
"Q1: 4th st, you pair your 4 - What do you do next? You are hig on board"
Check and fold 80-85% of the time
"Q2: What if you do not pair, but get an Ace? You are high on board."
Check and fold 95% of the time
"Q3: How far can you push the hand without improvemnt if 1 or 2 people continue to limp along?"
I'll use my judgement
"Q4: Suppose you bet $20 with the 4's or $10 with the Ace on 4th st. and you are now left heads-up against someone who just limped in and does not show a big pair. You figure him for a mid pair.
On 5th st. you have a choice to bet or check. Checking will show a weakness, but then again-you are."
Bet 80%-85%
"Suppose you push the hand possibly representing Aces or trip 4's or 2 pair when in faty you have garbage. There is almost just enough money in the pot for him to call a $20 bet even if he is on a draw. You bet and he calls. You both catch nothing apparent and you are still high? I would tend to check on 6th street? In general, is this correct?"
I think so. If he called you thus far he must have something. If you read him for a draw and you think he thinks you really do have something it's a crime not to bet(I think).
I think Berya's pretty much right. Pairing your door card as the bring in does not make for a very convincing bluff. I would check and fold most of the time, even with the ace on fifth street. It's just not a good bluffing hand. I would save it for when I really do have something even as the bring in. Then you can add some deception to your game. If you raise on fifth and he calls, I would most often check for as long as he allows me to play until I get that second pair. That way on the end the pot isn't big enough to require a call into that dangerous drawing hand.
Rockhard
with 4 callers theres alot of dead money in there. you need to know about how often the players that are in with you tend to fold in these situations. do they fold big pairs or do they go on if they can beat the board. bet often enough to show a profit from them folding too much. if they call too much then check and fold or call depending on what you think they may have. in bigger games the fear of trips is enough to make most hands end right there or on 5th steet. if you bet more than once you will probably see the river with the 2 fours as you may be getting odds.
I have given some thought to this issue - I have decided that it is NEVER correct to raise b4 the flop in omaha against a full table when you can expect at least 5 or 6 players in the hand.
The reason is that 90+% of the time you are drawing. If you have Axs and you flop a 4 flush, and you also have an open ender to a nut straight, you have a great draw, but you are still drawing. Also, if you flop a set of aces, you are STILL drawing to a full house, technically. (It is uncommon for trips to be a nut hand.)
Since all hands are draw hands, you want to get in cheaply early and then make money later.
Furthermore, if your hand is really superior, why would you want to take a chance and thin the field? Since you often need to have the nuts to win the hand it makes no difference how many others are in the pot. You most definitely wouldnt want any K high flushes or non nut straights to fold.
Is my reasoning sound? I will categorically refuse to play ANY omaha hand if i know it will be capped before the flop.
-SmoothB-
nmsg
Assuming that u are talking about Omaha High (although this applies to High Low 2) i feel that your thinking is seriously flawed. I play a great deal of High Omaha and raising before the flop especially in late postion against many limpers is a essential part of play. In my expierence in Omaha many players often limp in with inadequate values and raising in these situations seriously hurts their implied odds. In late postion i usually raise with any above average hand. eg QJ108, A988, 101098 ect. Your view that u will not play any Omaha hand if u know it is going to be capped b4 the flop is equally ridiculous. I can't imagine myself folding any first rate starting hand even with this prior knowledge as the concept of domination does not apply to Omaha (perhaps in High low like folding A2 junk against tight reraiser ect)If it was pot limit Omaha then your view would be more logical as i think early postion aggresion can be a mistake if money is deep (although i am not expert at the game). However even in pot limit Omaha it seems to me that late postion pre flop aggresion is a important part of correct play.
You're not getting it. Premium Omaha hands can flop LOTS of different draws, or huge multiple draws. As a result, they win a high percentage of pots. Since premium hands commonly make draws to the nuts, you want lots of callers. And you want to pot-stick them so that your Ace-high flush gets called down by the King, Queen, and even weaker flushes, and players with split pairs and bottom two pairs and small sets cannot release their hands when you flop top set.
In Omaha, most of my raising comes in late position after there have been many callers. In Holdem, most raising comes when you are first in.
Dan wrote: In Omaha, most of my raising comes in late position after there have been many callers. In Holdem, most raising comes when you are first in.
Excellent point. In the kind of game that SmoothB was talking about, raising early for the purpose of knocking players out is useless. Raising early to increase the mistakes made by players calling too loosely is not such a huge advantage because of position. Raising late with premium hands is the only time I raise in O/8 in these kinds of games. Loose, fairly passive b4 the flop 0/8 games are usually pretty easy to beat. See the flop cheap, draw to the nuts only. Scoop scoop scoop.
I'll try that strategy when I play O/8 next. I assume that you would reraise with a premium hand in early position, though.
Eric
With the premium hands and many callers you should raise in late position to get more money in.
With AA23 double suited and the like, you WANT to be in big hands with many players. Of course you are drawing. That's why they deal more cards 8-) .
You don't like variance in your game (nor do I) but it should not be allowed to affect your sound reasoning
Good Luck
i suspect with that strategy you would be a losing player for sure. its too hard to make enough money on later rounds giving up so much positive expectation early on. try reading david's getting the best of it for a better understanding of expectation.
I got Mason's Book on Draw, but want a book with a little more basics. Caro's book is out of Print. I got the Supersystem, but want more info.
Does anyone have suggestions? I just introduced Lowball Draw to my Home game and everyone is enjoying it more than Razz.
Thanks, CV
Chris,
I posted a similar question a couple of weeks ago. I find Lowball to be an interesting game, both A-5 and Kansas City. I couldn't find a book, but I am looking. Mason told me that Caro's book is out of print -- I even e-mailed Caro at Planet Poker but he hasn't gotten back to me. Mason said Super/System had a good section on lowball, but I haven't found that either.
I haven't found Mason's "Winning Concepts" to be very helpful in teaching fundamentals.
I'll keep you informed if I find something, if you could do the same.
Jon I.
I know that Caro's book is out of print and that he doesn't even have prints himself.
The Super system seems to have some good info in it. Anyway, the guys I play with call a raised pot and Draw three!
I just hate thinking that I'm going to reinvent the wheel trying to learn this game.
Later, CV
Caro's MCU Library at PlanetPoker.com has some basic statistical tables relating to both kinds of lowball. I found them pretty helpful.
If you have Mason's book and you have Super/System then I don't see what the problem is.As far as Mike Caro's out of print material goes, you must be referring to his Draw and Lowball Report which is very good but is not a book (consists of only a few pages ).
If you want Something more basic then Mason's book,you might want to get the book CARO ON GAMBLING.It has a crash course in lowball.It also cost only $6.95. If you have trouble finding it ,GBC has it in their catalog.This website has a link to their site.
If you want a little more then what is in Super/System ,then you may want to get Mike Caro's GUIDE TO SUPER/SYSTEM . It came out in 1997 and sells for $19.95.Anyone who has S/S would be wise to get it.
Hope that helps
Howard
It's been years since I played, but I liked Norman Zadeh's Winning Poker Systems. It has about fifty pages on lowball. It used to be available on BN.COM for a couple of dollars...
30-60 stud last night, full game.
I forget the cards that were folded on 3rd street, so I'll go with what I remember.
3rd street:
8 seat brings it in for $10 seat 1 (fairly loose player) raises to $30 with (xx) Ac
seats 2 and 3 fold
I reraise with (AhKh)Ad
seat 5 (very loose, very aggressive player) calls with (xx)3d
seat 6 folds
seat 7 (decent player, but chases too much at times) calls with (xx)5s
seat 8 folds
4th street:
I bet with (AhKh)AdQh
seat 5 raises with (xx)3dQd
seat 7 calls with (xx)5s3c
seat 1 calls with (xx)AcJs
I reraise, seat 5 caps it, all call.
5th street:
seat 7 checks with (xx)5s3c3s
seat 1 checks with (xx)AcJs7h
I bet with (AhKh)AdQhJc
seat 5 calls with (xx)3dQd2s
seat 7 and seat 1 call
6th street:
seat 1 bets with (xx)AcJs7hAs
I raise with (AhKh)AdQhJc5h
seat 5 calls with (xx)3dQd2s7d
seat 7 calls with (xx)5s3c3s2c
seat 1 calls
Q1: Raise or just call here? I thought the reasons for raising outweighed the reasons for calling here, but I'd like to hear other's opinions.
Q2: Assume seat 1 checks on the river. Depending on what card you catch, what do you do?
I would say that flat calling would be correct here. Your probably against at least two players with two pair, seat 5 and seat 1, one with open aces. There can be only two reasons to raise here. To drive out opponents or for value because you feel that you have the best hand. I think it highly unlikely that you have the best hand, and open aces aren't going to drop out.
If you catch a heart on the river, obviously you bet or raise. If you catch a ten for broadway, treat it the same way. If you catch a King or a Queen, I would bet if checked to or raise if bet into. If you catch a Jack, it's debatable, but I would probably raise. It's unlikely that the Aces second pair is higher than a Jack because there are Queens and Kings out in your hand and others. I put him on a small to medium pair in the hole. If you catch a five, just call or check. The problem seat is five. He may already have a flush and is slow playing or he may have queens up. Either hand you can beat, but you have to catch.
Any way you slice it, your drawing to the best hand, but don't have it yet.
You've got gangs of outs, and the pot is enormous. Depending on what your opponents have and how they play, raising may allow you to knock out a better aces up with a bet on the river (if you pair j or 5) and it also gets more money into the pot in a situation where you have the best of it (with all the hearts, tens, and two pair cards that you can catch, even though you are drawing, you have the best of it for $120 to go into the pot.)
I like the raise. Usually when I do something like this, I get screwed, but I still like the raise. Hell, I like getting screwed...
First thing to recognize is that you're not getting heads-up. You're only driving the pot up making it even less likely to get heads-up. You really need to get heads up. If you can't you should fold.
Second, everyone knows you're representing Aces. Some may question whether you actually have them, but they all know what you are representing. What are they representing? They are either chasing or they have you beat. You're up against three others. Odds are one already has you beat or may have a very good draw. You should have just called or folded once you saw that everyone was willing to call your aces.
Unless you have a really good read on all three players, you have to ask yourself why they are calling your aces.
Once you have the flush draw on sixth street, you are now obligated to call. The pot odds are just too big.
I would like to know what happen. In may opinion, this was one of those situations where you have to fold the aces, especially once the last ace appeared on the board. Somebody's got a flush or trips, even a full house. Eventhough you've driven the pot up so high, your odds of winning are low since everyone is telling you you don't have the best hand, and you will need to the best hand 90% of time to win this hand.
Still, I hope you won though I don't think you should have been in unless you had a real good read.
Rockhard
Have you misread the original post? At what point would you even consider folding aces in this pot? And then with a straight draw on 5th? And a flush draw on 6th?
I am very confused by your post.
Me too!
Plus, George is not representing Aces, he is representing a made straight.
He has aces, and is trying to misrepresent.
representing a made straight? but he raised on 3rd. I think everyone knew he had pair of aces.
I've been known to raise on 3rd street with AKT, or Ah4h7h, and even sometimes reraise with these cards on 3rd. Raising on 6th means he can beat Aces up--with something, the most likely something being the straight that he represented with the bet on 5th.
Unless a raise will knock someone out, and it seems fairly clear that it will not, this situation seems like a call is correct. The raise may allow the other players to put you on a draw and not aces, but they may put you on this hand anyway. Take the odds and call.
Clearly you would bet a flush or straight and pay off if you are beat on the river. If you catch two pair check and call if you are not raised and you pair your high cards. It appears that seat 5 may have a flush, so if you catch the flush and you think he will bet whether or not he made the flush, you can go for a checkraise. If he made the flush you are in good shape. If I made two pair with the five I would check and perhaps fold.
But why wouldn't the 5 seat 3-bet on 6th street with a made flush? She had to know that I couldn't have her beat at that point...
I don't care what you are known for, and the hand wasn't played by you anyway. Anytime to raise on third street with an Ace, you are representing Aces. You can't be saying you are representing anything else but Aces, I don't care if you played trash regularly on third street. That just means people will be less likely to believe you have what you are representing.
Of course, once you end up with a four flush or straight, you are almost obligated to call because of the pot odds. Remember, however, that you are calling, because you sucked yourself into the draw, not because you wanted to be there in the first place.
Remember the title of the post: raising with the 4th best hand. I take this to mean that he lost. Now the burden in on you to show that he did the right thing and lost in spite of it.
I only know this situation so well because I've screwed my self with it often. It's much easier to tell someone what they should have done than to do the correct thing when you're in the hand.
The biggest clue is the calls, followed by the raises. If you have aces and there are three or more player's in the game after fifth street, consider checking and folding. They are unlikely to fold a four card draw and will probably bet if they already have it, no matter how loose the players. The worst that can happen is that you loose to a bluff.
People like to chase. Actually, people love to chase. So why fold the best hand? What hand are you hoping for in this situation? Aces are hard enough to come by, there is no way I'm check-folding on 5th street with them unless I have a damn good read on a player.
There are plenty of times when an Ace upcard raises and I have an ace upcard that I'll reraise without having aces. Stud players in general horribly overplay an ace upcard on 3rd street. Often times I feel more comfortable when an ace raises than any other card.
I caught a jack on the river and bet it when checked to, seats 5 and 7 folded, seat 1 called, and my aces and jacks won the pot.
Did seat one have two pair?
I assume so, although he didn't show.
Congratulations. I think you played well although riskily.
Nice pot!
does anybody know what casinos offer stud 7/8 hilo split and play a lot of it? im on the east coast but thinking about doing some traveling.
They get a 20-40 half omaha, half hi/low stud at Casino arizona going most days of the week now. I know there are plenty of 8 or better games in LA as well.
Could someone tell me the best places to play O8 in Tunica? I'm planning on going down there soon and would liek to know what places spread it and how good/full the games are. I play any O8 up to 20-40.
Thanks, Patrick
i havent been to tunica in several months but the best games including omaha/8 were at the horseshoe. thats your best action in tunica and has been the last couple of years. im probably going to have to play more omaha/8 myself. it seems all the 7-stud/8 games are on the west coast and im in n.c.
Gold Strike usually has a 4-8 with a half kill I believe. Can be tough to get into.
Horseshoe spreads a 10-20 with a half kill fairly regularly. Have seen several but have also seen it during the week with no omaha at all.
In studying 7CSFAP (21st Century Ed.), I have come across an apparent inconsistency.
First, in the chapter "Playing Big Pairs," on p. 31 the authors state:
If you have a big pair, but two or more unduplicated upcards higher than your pair are behind you, you probably should fold if your kicker is poor and you don't have a two-flush.
OK, pretty straightforward. However, in the chapter entitled "Playing Small and Medium Pairs," on p. 43 the authors give an example in which the reader is dealt (9c Jd) 9d. The authors explain:
Your cards are live, no one is yet in the pot, but behind you is an ace and a king. (Notice that the Jd is a straigth flush card.) You should usually raise.
You can't fold the pair of nines with a suited jack if your cards are live even if you thought that there was a good chance that the player with the ace up does have two aces. So it is better to raise yourself. And in this case if you are reraised you have to call. If your jack was not a straight flush card then the right play is to raise, and if you get reraised, usually fold. (emphasis mine)
So, in the case where there are at least two unduplicated upcards behind you left to act on Third Street, the authors recommend folding a big pair with a crappy kicker in one example, but recommend raising with a medium pair and crappy kicker in another. Their explanation follows:
When you have the two nines (no matter what your kicker), one reason to consder raising with two overcards behind you is if they both fold you might get to charge a bad player with a smaller pair.
But if this is correct in the case where you are dealt a pair of nines, how could it not be correct in the case where you are dealt a pair higher than nines?
Q
am I missing something here? I thought the emphasis was on the suited kicker. It is better to raise with a suited kicker with a probable lower pair, than to raise with a larger pair with a kicker of a different suit. the flush draw gives another out which is a significant difference. F
You missed this part:
When you have the two nines (no matter what your kicker), one reason to consder raising with two overcards behind you is if they both fold you might get to charge a bad player with a smaller pair. (emphasis mine)
So the emphasis is not on the kicker, but rather on the fact that you have a medium pair and are hoping to get heads-up with a smaller pair.
Q
It is close between raising and folding without a nice straight flush kicker. The fact that your two nines have an offsuit jack rather than an offsuit deuce as the kicker is often enough to swing it.
I called but I think I should have raised. Full Online 4/8 ring game with .50 ante and $2 bring-in, raise to 4$.
6 Seat: 3h Bring in
7 Seat: 7s Calls
8 Seat: 7c Calls
1 Seat: 8h Folds
2 Seat: Ts Folds
3 Seat: (Qd5d)Qs Calls
4 Seat: 8d Folds
5 Seat: Kc Calls
My thoughts at the time were that I should try to thin out the Field on a later street, but does my 4% chance of making a Backdoor Flush change things?
Everyone caught blanks on 4th and all checked to me. I knew if I bet almost everyone would call. I lost a lot of money in some previous hands because I kept betting in this same situation and felt I was in the Horse Race parodox. I checked
On 5th most caught blanks again, but the 8 seat caught a Tc which went well (Straight Flush) with his 3rd street card. This made me second to act. I still just had a pair of Queens though all my Queens and Kicker Cards were live. The pot odds are close to 3 to 1 on a call. Seeing an opportunity to thin the field I raise. Even if the bettor has a 4 Flush (which is live) I'm still a favorite heads up.
I did thin the field with my raise leaving the pot three handed and ended up winning with a Full house vs. a Flush.
Comments?
Thanks, CV
chris,
i cant believe you play like that. how can you not raise on 3rd with the obvious best hand and again not bet on 4th st? the rest of the hand was probably ok if you read things right.
Believe me Ray in a regular game I would raise. It's these "very good" games that I start having problems with playing Big pairs.
These players are quite happy to call a raise cold on 3rd and call all the way down to the river because they have either a small pair or a live Ace in the hole. It seems to make Big pair play tricky sometimes and thats why I played this hand so strange.
CV
you are just shell shocked. stick your money in and wait for the long run. if you run out in the meantime forget about what i said. the problem you may start running into is that the free cards may begin to hit them and then you will see what happens. at best you will win smaller pots and at worst maybe lose much bigger pots all playing the worst hand. better to play all big pots with the best hand early on and take the lumps playing against the lumps.
Ray,
I have been consistantly frustrated with this strategy taking more lumps than pots.
First, with Queens, to bet them in late position in a loose game may commit players to the pot making it only harder to get them to fold on fourth street. It seems reasonable to wait till fourth street and hope that most of the players will draw blanks rather that raise on third with more players committed to the pot; but maybe I'm wrong and that extra bet will cause some to fold, leaving less to draw blanks?
It seems to me that he got heads up, which is the best he could hope for, besides drawing a full house.
What about after fourth street even if you are heads up and it's is clear that your opponent will call you, whether he has it or not, to sixth street (where he will raise if he has it and call if he doesn't) and then all the way to the river? Furthermore, you could be facing a higher pair in the hole. It seems to me that you are not getting very good implied odds in this situation.
Please help.
you got the best hand and its a live one. you are not looking for implied odds you are looking to get money in the pot. you want someone to call you all the way down most of the time as they are not going to fold in a spot that is a major mistake for them.
My post was trying to get at the Two Flush issue. After re-reading the text I should have raised because of my live 2 Flush and the extra outs that I had.
The problem comes up when the pair of Queens has an un-related kicker and I believe all my raise will acomplish is making the pot bigger. This depends on the players in the game and how I think the hand will be played. I guess I'll just have to find the point where this play of not raising 3rd str. works the best.
CV
C.V.,
I don't agree. You should raise with queens everytime unless someone has raised the pot before you with a higher upcard. In that case, re-raising, calling, or folding can be correct depending on your position and the other upcards.
Ray,
Am I right or wrong?
Rockhard
In the paradise stud games the structure sucks. 1 unit ante, 4 unit bring-in and first raise to 8 with 8-16 limit. There is no significant jump between bring-in and first raise to fold out the mook callers. They really need to lower the bring-in to 2 or 3 units.
-Fred-
Chris, even a conservative like myself would raise here. You have to thin the field or get money in the pot if you have best hand. I would also bet on 4th street and 5th street. Checking 5th street with the best or 2nd best hand can be fatal.
But would you then fold if re-raised or check on fold on sixth street if you remain unimproved?
From memory (I am on a slow computer at home). I would probably call if I think my queens were live and if I thought Queens up stood a good chance of winning. An almost identical thing happened to be Sat night at the Trop in a 5-10 game. 3 callers to the river and I thought I had the worst hand with Aces and jacks on the river. A 9 paired his door card early and raised and a lady raised on 3rd st and called all the way with 4 high spades showing. I folded the winning hand. Lady had bare Aces, the guy had 2 pair: 9's and 10's. you can be sure that will not happen again. I will count the pot and not overestimate the competition's hand. I would only have to win once in 4 or 5 times to show a profit.
Aces up might be worth a call, unless you can reraise and get people out; but calling multiple raises is probably unwise most of the time.
cv,
You must have been on a bad run because you definitely should of raised here as Z said. The worst scenario that could happen is the K reraises and you end up heads up which isn't that bad. Even if everyone calls you have the 2 flush, which isn't worth much but in a multiway it's another edge that will help you win the pot. You may have blown the flush out if you had raised on third and bet on 4th. You allowed him into the hand even though you won in my eyes you played it wrong. Seeing straight flushes that are (85-1) on three cards is possible but I want you to think back to the last str flush you had on three cards was. I personally can't remember but I have CRS!!
paul
I am sitting in a full 5-10-20 stud game with a $1 ante and $2 bring in.
(xx)3c brings in. A steamer raises (xx)Jc 2 horrible players call with small low cards. I put them on random hands. A new player raises (xx)5d A ridiculously tight passive player calls (xx)As I put him on Aces immediately or a high three flush. (xx)Kh cold calls.
Now its to me with (Qs6d)Qc and I fold thinking I am against kings and aces and my queens would not play that well against the full field.
I think this was a huge mistake. The better play was to call. With the weak hands in the pot plus the bring in and the antes, I must see the hand at least to fifth street. A raise on third was unlikely to move anybody. I should have called to fifth street and raised there to limit the field. I was wondering how the high premium pair should play against a likely higher possible premium pair in a high ante structured game like this one. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
I want to make it clear that in the hand above, I was 95% certain that I was up against kings and/or aces. Otherwise, I would have raised in a second.
If you would actually play your hand with half a brain you might actually get feedback on how stupid you are.
First, Gary: what are you trying to say? I do not understand what you mean. And suppose Small Timer players with 3/4 of a brain; then what?
Small timer: In my humble opinion, the key here is are you sure you are up against K's or A's? If you are, then you did the correct thing by folding. You are a dog in this hand. You would cold call 2 raises and possibly a 3rd with a 1 way hand?
These games often get a lot of people in on 3rd st because the price is cheap, but with 2 or 3 raises, it is now effectively a 10-20 or 15/30 game. Assume the limpers who do not get suited or straights drop out at 4th street, you are left heads up with overcards against you. Pass and wait till the next hand unless you like giving your money away. The most important decision you make is 3rd street. Look for a reason to fold. If you cannot find one, then bet. If you just look for reasons to just call, you'll find them and then you'll be looking for the Mac machine.
Hi, I am always thinking that a call is (4 new dealt hands) so if in doubt fold. but of course I don't always follow my advice and It does cost to chase. lol ron
This comment is inappropriate and you should be banned from the forum.
I agree. I am sure that Mr. Sweet always plays his hands so well because he has a perfect read on others' hands. I wish I could play that perfectly.
With all of the callers, you should consider the implied odds if you hit your hand with trips or better. I wouldn't chase the whole way, but it may be worth it to take off a card, especially if the A is so tight that you might be able to get him out. I wouldn't read him for more than two A's, so you are probably only against 2 higher pairs.
If my math is correct you are getting 4.7-1 on your two bet call, so I'd call, and keep a close eye on what happens on fourth and fifth.
I agree with Ratso. It appears to me that you had to call a double bet where no one folded. If it were just a call for a single bet, and you are late in position, I might say go ahead and call with our marginal hand; but it's two bets to you and everyone is calling the Ace and King. Play it safe and get out.
Last week, for four days and 4 nights, there was a $40-80 split game at the Bike...Stud Hi-Lo 8, Omaha Hi-Lo 8, and Stud Hi-Lo with no qualifier. Just wondering what adjustments you'd make to play in this unusual no qualifier stud game? I'd imagine it requires drastically different strategy. Thanks in Advance,
I think the place to look is in Supersystem. Sklansky says how to play, and says if you playing against bad players it is impossible to lose (as opposed to other games).
The main adjustments is alot of high hands become absolute garbage, i think you should muck almost any big pair (except aces). The hands which are good which are ones which can scoop and now w/no qualifier a hand like KKQ is almost never going to scoop. Good hands are things like 345.
Some freinds of mine used to really dislike this game. Some used to joke (half seriosly though) when someone elsed called this game ," why don't you just call razz."
Another said ,"there is something wrong w/this game bc if you have KKK your opponent(s) has a freeroll on you!"..." and there's something wrong w/that."
You guys aren't kidding about that luck factor in 7CS High only. I just sat in a game where a person played every hand almost completely to the river for 5hrs and was up about 100 when I left, and not everyone was a total fish either there was some tight players in the game. We just could not bust this guy. Meanwhile I'm stuck close to 300 (4/8 game). That just doesn't seem to happen in Hold'em people who play terrible cards go broke pretty quick and the people who play tight don't seem to run as bad.
Not to metion it was the first time I got hidden quad 2's stuck in me when I had Aces Full in Omaha Hi/Lo. Just not my day.
CV
I have to disagree here. I think the luck factor in 7CS is considerably less than in HE, esp compared to low limit nofoldem HE. In 7CS, often if you can establish "believeabilty" you can bluff and semi-bluff successfully, especially if you have shown good hands. In low limit, I seldom, make that almost never, bluff if I am getting called on my good hands. In mid limit where the antes and bring-in give me 4:3 I find it profitable to steel antes with high card bluffs. The game dictates the strategy
Luck is a significant factor. Overtime, your should win IF you play well all the time. Even then, I believe, your edge is incredibly small.
Don't you think that everyone has the same amount of luck. Doesn't luck really equal chance? If you answer "no", then please try to explain what mystical factors give one person more luck than another.
For example, my brother-in-law hits the number (the lottery) about once a month for about a thousand dollars. That is what the family hears. "He is a lucky MF", they say. The fact is that he spends about $15-20 a day that he admits to on his regular numbers, then of course when he see a truck license plate he likes, he has to play that. Is he lucky....yea, lucky he ain't broke.
In conclusin: we all have the same volume of luck.
I play low limit 7cs and see some lucky player they go up and down. But over the night (4-5 hours) lucky players generaly go broke. if the cards are not hitting me i will play 1 out of 10-15 and look for a reason to fold . a four dollar bet is about 12 new hands counting low card bring in's Luck has very little to do with it in low limit have a good night.
I disagree. I played a hand 1-3 hand last weekend. The player to my left had rolled up trips. By fifth street, I had a queen high flush. On the river, I read him to have unimproved trips. He turned his hand over and said "I have trip sevens." I showed my flush. Then the dealer read his hand and proclaimed: King high flush. It that or is that not luck? You can't read a player who doesn't know what he has.
Rockhard.
I couldn't disagree more. Luck is the over-riding factor in low-limit. In the long term, you can win at low-limit but NOT if you are getting below-average cards. You simply can't do it. If anything, luck is less of a factor in tougher (generally higher-limit but not always) games where you can win pots with plays. In low limit, the rule is: no cards, no pots. Period.
In the long term, the cards should even out for each player but this can take thousands of hours.
natedogg
I've also noticed that 7CS has a large variance attached to it. I think part of this reason is due to the many cards still to come. For example, on 3rd street when people should be really critical of their hands, you have less than half your hand, so all kinds of interesting things can happen.
I'm pretty sure they also talk about the high swings of 7CS in 7CSFAP right in the intro. There is a caveate in there about 7CS swings compared to other games.
My $0.02
Brett
I hate to post two responses but I must comment on the math of luck. You must remember that you are talking about VERY long times before luck "evens out" and even then it never really evens out.
For example, take a coin flip with one million trials. If the results were 502,500 heads and 497,500 tails, this is certainly within the expected deviation. Of course, this would be of little solace if I were betting on tails. You can have large swings in results even if you are a very good player due to the luck factor in the short run, and the short run can last a lot longer than we would hope.
So, if you were betting on tails, did you have bad luck??
In a sterile environment, that analogy works. However, if we accept the idea that a "good" player is one who can manipulate how the other players react, then even on a "bad luck" day, he should still win. In a lot of games, some players never have to hold a hand to win. "No-fold-em" games are a different animal altogether, and often the best advice is simply to stay out of them, because indeed, in the short run, that is the closest poker situation to fit your coin flip analogy.
It really comes down to cards. I played a 5-10 game last week for 6 hours and never got better than three nines. Worse yet, four times I had Q's, K's or A's AND a four flush on fourth street and not once did I get two pair or a flush. It was a bad session.
Yes, I just finish a lossing night after 4 winning nights . (i was thinking I was too good for LUCK) then I never had anything and everyone it seem made their hands on 6-7 street. So luck yes short run or go broke in long run without playing skills, what ever they are? LOL ron
This is Hold 'em where both hole cards must play. I've found a home game where they play it; anyone got any tips?
Sounds Greek to me.
.
It's Railbird you know me, I don't need money or anything I just need to talk with you one on one when you have a chance. My email is QQbirdieQQ at AOL dot com look me up cuz I have a few questions to ask you.
I was playing five-handed O/8 in a relatively serious home game with some friends.
I was one in the small blind with Ad3d7h7s. A solid, more experienced O/8 player was in the big blind. All three other players had limped in, so I called. Button raised and we all called. Flop came Kh8h4c rainbow.
I bet out (why, I don't know). All four called. Turn came 7c. I was worried about the A2 so I checked (?). BB checked and UTG bet. Next guy folded, and one caller after him. I called. BB called.
River came Th. I bet out with my A3 low and trip 7s. BB raises, UTG calls, I call. BB had A2 and UTG had the flush.
I am new to O/8. I am sure I butchered this hand -- first by playing A3s77 -- but I figured it was decent to play shorthanded. I am having difficulty grasping when I should play A3 and 23 preflop. Any comments?
First of all, 23 is a much worse combination than A3. It has no high-card power, and makes the third low rather than the second low. There are very few hands I would play with 23 (lacking an Ace, by definition)--perhaps 2345, but that's about it. The dynamics of A3 are as follows: naturally, you are aware of the possibility of making the second low and bleeding chips. This is somewhat--but only somewhat---counteracted by the possibility of the low containing a deuce (but no A or 3) or the made low getting counterfeited by specifically a deuce on the turn/river. I would treat this combination as insufficient to play EVERY hand containing it (as opposed to A2 which is almost always playable). The particular hand you held, A377, is horrible. If you flop a 7 (your only real high-card help) then there are straights and lows out there in all probability. You can get in a "sandwich" with the second low and losing trips, neither of which you feel you can throw away until that sinking feeling occurs when the betting is capped on the river. What would I like with my A3? Well, I wouldn't mind a 4, for "counterfeit" insurance (in case I DO flop the lucky low/low draw with a deuce). I also wouldn't mind high cards that work with the ace, especially a suited card (AKQ3, for example). What I DON'T want is middle cards, which are death in this game. Something like A367 I throw away without hesitation. So to answer your question, yes, A3 is dangerous. It plays just like a Kx second-nut flush draw---winning small pots and losing huge ones. You wouldn't be all that badly off playing the hand cheaply before the flop, and not paying to draw to a low that didn't include a deuce. I would also NEVER play a hand that contained a 7, 8, or 9 (with the A3). It works for me :)
i for one think your preflop play is fine for a five-handed game.
your flop bet with top and bottom pair, with no flush draw and no guarantee of even having a3 be second nut low, was horrible.
check-calling the set with second nut low was probably a mistake on the turn, but the bigger mistake was betting the end when the flush card hit.
there's no way your bet will get a j9 straight or the flush to fold, and there's no way anyone will call you with less than a set.
rob
Jon - "I was one in the small blind with Ad3d7h7s. A solid, more experienced O/8 player was in the big blind. All three other players had limped in, so I called. Button raised and we all called."
There seems something amiss with your reporting here, Jon. Since you're in the small blind doesn't the button have to bet before you do? (If you’re in the small blind the button doesn’t have the option of raising after you have called). If all three other players (besides the blinds) limped in, doesn't that mean the button limped in also? The button either limped or raised, but not both. I’m going to assume that the button limped rather than raised before the flop.
As an aside, I like the way the big blind played his A-2. Were you lured into thinking you had the best low hand because of the play of the big blind?
I disagree slightly with KevinL. I think Ad3d7h7s is definitely worth seeing the flop in an unraised pot in a five player game. Otherwise I pretty much agree with him.
In a full game (nine players) I don’t play A3 if the other two cards are two of the following: 7,8,9 - unless the ace is suited, in which case I would consider the hand a marginal hand rather than an unplayable hand. Thus in a full game I would consider Ad3d7h7s a marginal hand. Here you are in the small blind and will thus be in the worst position for the rest of the betting rounds. Probably you should be cautious about playing marginal hands if you have poor position. Still, all things considered, I would grit my teeth and see the flop if I could do so cheaply in a full game (nine players), hoping for a flop with (1) the miracle two sevens, (2) two or three diamonds and no pair, or (3) a deuce plus another low card or two (and not including an ace or a trey).
But this is a five player game, not a nine player game. It would seem that in a five player game (1) the nut flush would decrease in value (because there would tend to be fewer callers from whom to collect) while (2) the second nut low would increase in value (because A-2 would be less likely to by held by an opponent with fewer opponents). Since a low being possible is about fifteen times as likely as any particular flush being possible, it would seem as though the increase in value of the A-3 with fewer players would more than compensate for the lack of profitability of the nut flush. Thus overall, Ad3d7h7s would seem stronger in a five person game than in a nine person game.
I agree with KevinL that the pair of sevens is awful, but I believe the combination of the nut flush draw plus the second nut low draw make the hand playable, pre-flop, in a five person game. Even the pair of sevens, although still not good, is at least better in a smaller game. The danger of playing a low pair is catching a lower full house than one of your opponents when the board pairs, but the fewer the opponents, the less you have to worry about having a lower full house than someone else. Still, I agree with KevinL that the pair of sevens could be trouble (as it turned out to be here).
Second nut flush and second nut low Omaha-8 hands have this in common: you might not want to aggressively bet them. Here you’re in the small blind. I believe if you’re going to play a hand from the small blind after the flop, it’s generally better to bet than to check and call. Can you see that because of your position you’re in an impossible situation here? You have the second nuts low draw after the flop, a holding you should hardly want to bet, yet since you’re in the small blind you should probably bet any hand you’re going to play after the flop. Because of your impossible situation, the conclusion would seem to be Ad3d7h7s is unplayable after the flop in the given set of circumstances (the particular flop, your poor position, and the number of opponents in the hand).
I agree with Rob (Viking) that your bet on the river is your worst mistake (although he didn’t phrase it quite that way). Your bet on the river is a nullo play. A nullo play is a play that cannot possibly gain for you, a play that can only lose. (On the river, the only hands which could call your bet are better hands than yours, and at least one of those hands will likely raise, which is what actually happened).
:-)
Buzz
No hand is dangerous when played properly.
Even 5678 when played properly (by throwing it away pre-flop) is perfectly safe.
In Omaha, only draw to the nuts, and while sometimes you can play hands with middle pairs in them if they have other redeeming qualities (A suited Ace, A-2 or A-3 working with them) you should treat sets that you make with middle plair as potentially huge traps.
5 handed 7cs game at Turning Stone. I've been stealing pots left and right but have yet to be called down. I raise on 3rd with (QQ)A and get called by a 4. I bet on fourth and fifth street and the 4 calls with no flush or straight possibilities on his board.
On sixth he catches a four and I catch a queen. He bets, I raise, and he reraises. Do I 4-bet or just call?
I'm sure the 4 puts me on aces up, so the reraise doesn't imply a full house. On the other hand, would the 4 call my fifth street bet with just a pair?
If he's full and 5 bets (knowing I can't be full yet), my raise has lost me two extra bets if I don't fill. If I do fill, it wins me two extra bets.
If he only has trips, he will probably check to me on the river but bet if he fills. So my raise gets me one extra bet if he doesn't fill and loses one extra bet if he does (unless I fill, too).
I decided to call on 6th. I filled on the river and raised and didn't get to see his hand.
You will probably do better by just calling. If you 4bet and he is full, you will lose more money when you dont fill yourself. If he just has trips you should be able to win the same amount/lose the same amount by calling but now you can raise with near certainty of having the best hand everytime you fill up.
By Four betting 6th street you stand to lose 3extra bets when your hand is up against a full house and you dont improve.
By just calling you will be able to raise his bet on the river when you do improve, but by four betting on 6th street you would not have this luxury as he will likely check and call the river unless he is full.
Looks like one of those situations where if your hand is good you will likely win the same amount by being passive, but lose more by being aggressive. I think raising on the river would be good if he still thinks you have aces up. Now you probably will not be reraised even if he is full since he knows that it is possible for you to fill your big "two pair".
Steve - If Ad3d77 is an excellent hand, how about an example of a marginal hand?
I've got an "A" list of hands (hands to play in almost all situations). Now I'm working on a "B" list; hands to play in a short handed game and in good position in an unraised pot in a full handed game.
Does my plan make sense to you? Do you think in terms of classes of hands, some playable in some situations but not in others?
Buzz
I liked your advice about raising UTG with A-4-X-X, where X = 5,T,J,Q,K. I had been raising UTG with A-3-X-X where X = 4,5,6-with-suited-ace,J,Q,K and also raising, UTG, with any hand on my playable list if the bottom card when I picked up my hand was a red card (but not in a passive game - I don't like to disturb the equilibrium in a passive game, but that's another topic).
300-600 stud at the bellagio (yes, it's a little high for me, but oh well)
5 seat brings in, 6 and 7 fold, 8 seat (older, fairly tight player) raises with the Ah up, I have rolled up tens and just call, seats 2 and 3 fold, seat 4 (the reason the game is going, a couple hours ago he had to clarify whether or not a straight beats a flush) calls with the 9s, seat 5 calls with whatever he had (I forgot).
Q1: Is it worth a reraise on 3rd street? It was a fairly tight game and I was willing to risk it to build a big pot for this hand.
4th street:
Seat 8 bets 600 with (xx)AhAc.
I call with (TcTs)Th7c
Seat 4 calls with (xx)9s3c?!?!?
Seat 5 catches an ace and folds.
Q2: Raise or just call here? I'm loving seat 4's overcall here, I figured why raise him out...
5th street:
Seat 8 bets with (xx)AhAc3h
I call with (TcTs)Th7c4h
Seat 4 calls with (xx)9s3c4s.
Q3: Bet or raise here?
6th street:
Seat 8 checks with (xx)AhAc3h6h
I bet with (TcTs)Th7c4hQh
Seat 4 calls with (xx)9s3c4s9c
Seat 8 calls
Q4: Bet or check here? I felt this one was obvious, but maybe it wasn't.
River:
Seat 8 checks, I catch a 7 to fill up, I bet, seat 4 calls, seat 8 check raises, I think for a minute and reraise, seat 5 folds, seat 8 calls.
Q5: Good reraise or bad reraise?
Any comments on this hand are appreciated...
George,
Q1: Is it worth a reraise on 3rd street? It was a fairly tight game and I was willing to risk it to build a big pot for this hand.
IMO if someone raises Ah up and I'm rolled up I raise. Your playing against the A up but who knows clueless could outdraw you since he likes to gamble charge him the limit rather than the calling price and if he drops so be it.
The rest of the way I agree with the way you played.
Paul
300-600!! you must need some bankroll to continually play in this game!
I normally play 30-60 thru 75-150, but I take my shots occasionally... There's no way I could play that big consistently right now.
What did seat 8 end up having?
I'm guessing he had a flush, although he never showed.
Oh, I can take a shot at a big money game and without a lot of people in before me. Here goes:
Q1: Do you want to advertize and get head to head with an ace and try to "win it now"? Or do you want to maximize and take a chance. Not an easy call for me, I think a raise is a better. Put me on tens or high pocket pair. I will get a call from an ace and the calling station.
Q2. Just a call here. No need to dump the calling station or advertize my trips. If there are trip aces out there, them I'll take the chance.
Q3. Just bet here.
Q4: I think I have the best hand, and it helps that I saw an Ace fold on 4th street. I bet. No raise....great!
Q5: I would reraise too. I figure he either has a high flush or trips.
Bury me now or did I pass?
I may be in the minority here but I say you call on third street and raise on fourth. I have two reasons for this. First, calling on fourth street is pretty much announcing trips anyways. Ace raised on third street representing a pair of aces and now catches an Ace. This represents trips or Aces up. Who in thier right mind would stay around with tens or even tens and sevens. Raise and make the Ace pay for drawing to a full house. If the clueless guy is really that clueless, he'll call anyways. I would bet when checked to on fifth street and beyond and reraise the clueless guy on the end. He most likely has trip nines or nines full.
Just a humble oponion of a 5-10 player.
you make a good point
Re-raise on fourth street just to see if he has trips.
Mike,
If you are assuming the A has trip A's you are a big underdog and should fold. (probably 3-1). But I think one should think he doesn't have trip A's as the A is out. It becomes more obvious that he doesn't.
Maybe I misunderstood when you said , "make him pay for his full house." I thought you thougt he had trip A's but maybe you think he has two pair...
If I were George, I would think that the Aces probably had two pair, but even just the Aces would make it suspicious for you to stay in with 10 7 offsuit showing. If you raise here, the aces won't fold and mister clueless won't fold either, so you raise for value and play those trips fast the rest of the way.
Although I know little about 7stud, I couldn't resist adding my 4 cents. The only action of yours that I dislike is your call on 5th street. Since the pot has become quite large, I think it is time here to raise the clueless guy out (or make him pay 2 big bets to chase you).
Hmm...
It would be very helpful to know at least some of the upcards, and some more info on the palyers... but here's my best shot/analysis.
1) This is really dependent on the player in the 8 seat. Could he be tryign to steal the ante's? (If so a reraise might lose him, although at lower-limits (15-30) this rarely happens), would he raise w/3flush w/ two high cards, or does a legit raise connotate A's or a big pocket pair? I think the call is ok in most situations. (how many hearts are out? would he play w/ many hearts out? (you might be able to rule out a flush if this was the case).
2)You may like the sucking the 4 seat in but I think you have to raise on 4th or 5th. What do you think A's thinks you have? Either a monster (he's paired his doorcard after raising, one might think 2pair, trips, or 3flush w/2A's) but coud he think you started w/ adrawing hand and improved and are discounting trip A's bc of the dead one? But I think the call is ok. But things are beginning to look suspicious, in that pairedA"s on 4th usually result in the end of the hand against good players.
3) raise now ! if the A had a 3 flush he now has a 4, and though you are a favorite (he'll make the flush less than 50% of the time, but he pbly will make it ~ 35% (i don't have my calculator w/me)), and you pbly won't boat up more than 35% of the time now. So you want him to make a "mistake" and if you just call he's got odds to call I think. As for the turkey in the other seat raise him out too for the same reason, if he started w/ a 3 flush, he's also made a 4 flush, and if that's that the case it's likely one will make it, raise and make them pay!.
4) Uh oh, will the 4seat check raise w/the flush if he has it? I do'nt like Qh, if he srated w/ a three flush you are now an underdog and if he happened to sart w/ Q's... but thats pbly not likely. seat 4 may have trips 9's and it likely 8 has at least a flush flush, or two pair. But even if you are raised, you can't be a big underdog and can call.
5) It really depends if you think he's checkraising w/a flush (which is possible and seems the running theme, and maybe he thinks you think he doesn't have a flush bc you have two on board.
What happened in the hand? Did you see the other players hand?
The Aviation club of Paris says:
"We have mostly dealer's choice games, where each player chose between 8 different games on his turn; texas hold'em, Omaha, Omaha Hi-Lo, 7 stud, 7 nullo, aviation, courchevel, and 7 Hi-Lo"
What in the world are 7 nullo and courchevel and how do I learn to beat them?
Bill
Courchevel is a form of Omaha where one common (board) card is exposed before the first round of betting, then two (rather than three) common cards are exposed on the flop.
I heard of courcheval last year and recognised it as a member of the mississippi 7cs family: it is easy to explain it as a version of omaha, but it is actually based on an underlying structure of 3-2-1-1, which is the signature of the mississippi family. Omaha and all members of the holdem family are based on a 2-3-1-1 structure. That is, there are always only two live cards, or multiples of two live cards dealt at the start. In courcheval you have a total of six three card combinations to start, just as in omaha you have six two card combinations: this means that your chances of starting with trips in courcheval are about six times that of seven-card stud, or about 1/70.
I understand courcheval is played at PL and perhaps NL, rather than limit-betting. I haven't done the stats for courcheval yet (to be truthful I had forgotten all about it) but the stats for murrumbidgee - which is a stud version with one less supernumerary hole card - will give you handle on how much of a role straights and flushes play in games of this structure: it's about 4 1/2 times as easy to make a straight or flush when you start with three live cards as when you start with only two, so obviously they play a huge part in courcheval, and in all 3-2-1-1 games. If you play courcheval with one or two less supernumerary cards, you get billabong holdem and shanghai holdem.
(Stats for murrumbidgeee and some other 3-2-1-1 games can be found at the no-limit stud website at www.geocities.com/mississippi_seven)
Damn, I'm forgetting the rules to my own games: courcheval has five communal cards, whereas shanghai and billabong have only four, with the first upcard being dealt to each player individually.
Billabong is (2)1+<2+1+1>, shanghai is (2,1)1+<2+1+1> whereas courcheval is (2,2)<1+2+1+1>. (Cards inside angle brackets are communal,and the second number inside the round brackets represents the extra half-live hole cards.)
The nearest relatives to courcheval are actually pinatubo and three-card pinatubo, which aren't in casino play yet. (In fact no 3-2-1-1 game except courcheval is, yet.) Pinatubo is (2)<1+2+1+1> , 3-card pinatubo is (2,1)<1+2+1+1> Unlike courcheval these two games only really work with a 32 or 36 card deck.
Courchevel.
Played like Omaha, i.e. each player must use 2 cards from their hand.
4 or 5 cards dealt to each player, usually 5.
Played High only.
Pot limit.
First card of the flop is exposed before the first round of betting.
Flop completed (3 cards total)
Betting.
Turn
Betting
River
Betting
7 Card Nullo - The French term for London Lowball.
Played Pot Limit.
7 Card Stud Low.
Straights and flushes count against you.
Ace is low.
Best hand is A2346 of mixed suits.
Jon Shoreman
www.european-poker.com
On a number of occasions last weekend, I found myself playing a flush against a trips. I wonder whether, after having made a flush on fifth street, whether I should bet into the trips or just call hoping he doesn't full up; but definately check and call on the end.
I think betting into trips is not correct, but letting trips believe that you are on the draw with a flush is. So check and call all the way.
CV
This is a pure math problem. I will not tell you the answer. If you figure it out, you will always remember it. Consider 4th st. How many of your suit are out? For the suspected trips, is/are his trip card(s) live? How much in the pot? Do you suspect rolled up or did he pair the door card.
On 5th street: same questions plus how many people still in the game? Implied odds? What are the odds of catching the flush vs. the odds of opponent catching full house or quads vs. the pot odds.
Finally on the river if you make the flush, I would suggest check/call. If you show flush and opponent bets, I figure he has you beat 90% of the time. I did see a player bet into a flush draw with nothing on the river as a bluff. That is why a call is mandatory on the river with a lot of $$ in the pot.
Question, if you think you are beaten with a higher trips hand would you fold? so if you think you are beat with a flush on the 5street do you fold trips if, 1,2,3,4,5or 6 of your other cards are dead? I saw four flush this weekend with no flush, so being new what do you do if you think you are beaten on 5street fold and save bet or go all the way. and what is the difference between being beaten by higher trip you think and being beaten by flush if you think that what the other player has? thank you ron
Oh no, not a math problem. I need help with math problems.
I'll answer the questions you pose:
First, I faced both situattions where I suspected rolled up trips and where the person paired his door card. On fourth street, there were no more than one of my cards out on the board. I definately wouldn't have played if more than three of my cards are out, but considering the trips, I probably wouldn't chase if three of my cards or out.
Second, each time I had the flush on fifth street, but it's a good question whether someone should even bother to chase a flush against possible trips no matter how live the cards are. Of course, there's always the question of whether your suspicions are correct.
Finally, what the odds are is exactly my question. Having already made the flush I assume that a call is at least correct, and a bet is correct so as not to give him a free card, assuming he would re-raise once he gets the full house. Usually, in this situation there are now only two players in the pot, but no more then three.
So now, are you asking me to divide 9 cards by 29 verses 4 by 29 to arrive at the odds of the completed flush beating the trips?
I probed this baby a million times so you know the numbers are accurate. I pulled out one dead card, the 9c so that you couldn't have any Straight Flush Redraws to your King High Club Flush, but it doesn't even make a 1% differance.
As it turns out you are a favorite to win this hand on 5th.
You: (Kc,Jc)3c,7c,8c
Him: (Ac,? )Ad,4s,Ah
You win: 58.88%
You lose: 41.12%
If he's rolled up your job is easy, but if he paired his door card I think you should just call his bets. If he checks to you on the river than I would seriously consider betting. If he was full I think he would bet into you most of the time because he knows you will be afraid to bet into his scary paired door card after he checks on 7th.
Later, CV
If I had only two flush cards on board, as happens occasionally,I will bet on the end in the hope of being raised by trips(which a good player might do even without a full house) and I'll pay off if beat. Maybe it's not the greatest or smartest play though.The question is how well do you know your opponent.
10-20 7Stud and lower. The advice I have read generally says slow-play rolled up trips if Jacks or higher, fast-play lower trips.
My experience indicates that when you slow play big trips and get a lot of callers, you seem to end up most of the time with big trips playing against made straights and flushes. Sure, you make some money when you fill, but do you make enough to overcome the misses?
It seems to me that trips aren't that strong a hand, no matter how big they are. I wonder if you need to fast-play even trip Aces.
Comments?
The reason to slow play high trips rolled up is mostly because of deception. Your trips are completly hidden and opponents never think that your rolled up (once in every 424 hands). I would say that the action you get from two pair and the action you get when you fill up and someone makes a flush, straight, or lower trips or full house, more than makes up for those times that you lose unimproved.
Low trips need to be played fast for the simple reason that it is too easy for someone else to stay in with one pair and make higher trips.
The average winning hand is trip 8's in 7CS with 8 players and an average of 4 river callers. High trips wins about 85% (I think) of the hands. Personally, I only remember when I get beaten so I like to play all trips fast espically in higher limits. Naturally, the blend of the game is important. Overall, you will probably show a profit no matter what you do, but the low trips-fast and high trips-slow will probably show more profit over the long haul. Of course you will remember when "you should have played them fast".
In 10-20 stud, 5-10 stud, and the spread limit stud games like 1-3, 1-4 and 1-5, where the ante is very low (to the point of where it is more like a holdem game) then I think slow-playing is correct--people are not likely to be getting correct odds to chase you even on an unraised bet. These are the thirteen best (actually more than thirteen, huh? cause 2c2d2h is different from 2c2d2s etcetera) but still among the very best starting hands out of 132,600. I don't know if I would give a free card, but I might well check and call or call a bet in front of me...in such a low ante game.
In a bigger game, a real stud game like 15-30 with a two dollar ante, or some of the lower limit stud games like 4-8 with a .50 ante or 6-12 with a dollar ante, then it becomes more correct to play trips fast--particularly small trips.
Hi, i would play trip slow against 1-2 player and fast play even ace's with more than 2 because i lose when trying to beat 3 drawing hands. and might fold very low trips against 2 player that you know are on drawing hands
I don't see why low trips would do worse than high trips against two drawing hands. And I really don't see why folding trips could possibly be a good idea, since you have the best hand with redraws to the full house.
Unless you are talking about on the river?
Also, depending on the street you are talking about, fast playing aces might build such a big pot early when the bets are small that you will never get a chance at knocking people out later when things are scary for your trips and the bets are big.
Since rolled-up trips occur so rarely to begin with, and AAA-JJJ even more rarely, a more probable explanation for your experience is that you haven't played enough of them to have a meaningful sample. However, these hands are huge and will win a high percentage of the time over the long haul. So you should normally play in whatever way gets the most money into the pot, be that slow, fast, or middle gear. If you start worrying overly much about drawing hands, you will throw away a lot of profit over the long haul.
Actually I think in a igher limit game 10/20 or bigger slowplaying big trips can be a mistake, in that if you have say KK K, and you just limp, but you raise with a king you may have a split pair of kings, or even a high 3 flush or just to steal the antes. In fact not raising might even look suspicious if you have the last hight card and are first to call the bring in.
I think the advice you are sighting is West's.
Caro says actually in general you should do what seems natural. If it looks natural to raise, say a K entered the pot and you have AAA youd raise as if you had A A x. etc...
Check and call the entire way to the river. When you don't improve and lose the pot just flick the cards a few times and yell "damn, can't seem to win with the trips from the go."
do they still work? i am reading his section of supersystem. it's is quite amusing but i doubt these plays still foster the crazy image in cardroom draw games. the image generated is probably one of a student of the game who has read caro.
not that i have ever seen a draw game, but i just figured i ought to have all my bases covered. so i am learning draw, lowball, razz, etc. all the games that only exist in lore.
scott
First of all, many of these "image" plays seem so contrived and obvious that only total morons would fall for them. Second, if this succeeded at all, it was only because of the ante structure in draw, where the bets were very large in comparison to the starting pot, making incorrect calls large errors. So getting a few extra calls in a session could easily make an image play pay off, and there is only one bet to pay to make those plays. For this and many other reasons, they would never work in holdem.
As for games like draw, lowball, and razz, I find they often resurface in home games. And learning one game helps in analogous situations in other games. Since most cardrooms only spread holdem, O-8, and stud, I think it would be interesting if there were more variety. If those games are not sustainable alone since the better players' advantage is too high, maybe cardrooms could spread mixed games where draw or razz or lowball was one round. HORDE? SLOE? SHRED?
i agree with you both on the plays being wrong (if they work) for other games and on it paying to undrstand all games.
david is super right that razz makes concepts stark.
i would love to play in mix games but i am only up to 10/20, 15/30. i probably won't be able to afford SHRED for a couple more years.
you seem to imply that these plays never worked. really? that's a shame.
scott
i agree with you both on the plays being wrong (if they work) for other games
The specific plays mentioned don't apply, but the general theory does. It kind of works like this:
Most players don't understand correct play when they see it. So if you can convince them that the "correct" plays you are making are being made because you are "crazy" they will give you more action.
It really *is* that simple.
- Andrew
I did that once just by my comment afterward. A pretty good player was driving the betting (he had top pair/top kicker), and I was drawing to a double-inside straight, with 8 outs for making a straight. I made my straight on the river, and he disgustedly said, "On a gut-shot, yet!" (He didn't see the double draw.) I just beamed at him, as I was raking in the pot, and said, "I just had a hunch I would hit it!" You could just see the steam rising off him.
Dick
Try it cheaply at no limit holdem. You'll get lots of action later.
or 'How To Win At The Lower Limits" pub. 1996
Anybody heard of this book? Actually, it's more like a booklet - soft cover, loosely bound.
I was just loaned this book today and am about to begin reading it.
Thanks
I like how it actually has a starting hands ranking list...unlike Ray Zee's book which doesn't. Zee's, Smith's, and Payne's book are must reads. There's no reason for you to only read one. Read'em all!
It's a pretty good book. Other than the Office Depot binding, I can't find anything terribly wrong with it.
I've been learning to play 5 card draw Lowball Ace to 5 at my Home game.
A problem that always comes up is that we run out of cards, because these players are loose. How do I deal with this problem properly when players want to discard their whole hand and get 5 new cards?
As a matter of fact I couldn't find the answer in The Pro Poker Dealer's Handbook. Looks like Draw was skipped in the 'Games Played' section. Though there was some very interesting rules about dealing with lack of cards in the 7CS section. I didn't know that the last card is delt community and face up.
Thanks, CV
You're not supposed to play Draw with more than 5 players!
Sorry, but there's just no way around it, unless you shuffle and deal the discards, but that's considered a BIG no-no. If you have more than five players, someone has to sit out.
Play Razz instead. It's more fun anyway and you can play up to 8 players if you use a community card on the last round (when necessary). Lowball is about as exciting as watching paint dry.
Ace-to-Five Lowball Draw California style with Joker is/was played eight-handed. Says so right in the Super System pg.179.
CV
.
Chris,
CMIIW, but I was under the impression that some/most/all Lowball games have a draw limit of two cards. I think this would virtually eliminate your problem.
Jon I.
before you limit the draw try to find some other way to solve the problem. any other way.
but if you must, try a limit of 4 or 3. do not limit people to draw 2.
if people want to draw 5 i will do anything i can think of to allow it.
scott
scott,
I totally agree that for purposes of my EV it is best that other players be allowed to play badly and draw more than 2 cards. However, I can't see how a full-tabled game of lowball can be maintained any other way. Even at a three card draw limit the risk of running out of cards is large in a group of ignorant players. Maybe I would rather have at my table seven players playing badly by drawing two cards too often than have four players playing badly by consistently drawing 3, 4, or 5 cards? I don't know, but from a perspective concerned only with implementing the game, I think a two card draw limit is the only way to maintain an eight-handed lowball game.
cv,
Tell them that they have to have at least one card 5 or below to draw 5 and to hold it aside until after.
good luck Paul
s
54 or 53 in deck 40 dealt out loose game and people want to take 5 with 13 or 14 cards left??? I was trying to show the ridiculousness of it that's all!!!
ukw
I thought that your tongue might have been firmly planted in cheek. It surely is a ridiculous scenario. But if you want to play lowball you have to do it in homegames, and if you play in homegames you have to be prepared for the ridiculous.
you shuffle the discards.
But Michael,
By resorting to the the discards in lowball you are creating a significant disadvantage to those drawing later in the round. Its not like Draw/Jacks in this regard. The discards are going to contain no (or few) cards that could complete your low hand.
Jon I.
...in a Casino where this happened. What was the policy? I'm suprized one of the old geezers haven't piped up to tell us punks how the game was dealt back then.
CV
surely I have played and you deal from the discards.
Collect all the discards first. Count how many you need left in deck. If stock is too small then shuffle all the disards in to it. Then deal out new cards. Does create the possibility you could get the exact same card back that you just threw away, but it least its fair.
use a double deck? The suits are unimportant. If they are going to draw 2/3/4/5 cards, you don't want to discourage them :)
When lowball is played by experienced players, there are rarely more than four people in, and the people in rarely draw more than one card. (Except an unraised big blind.) So you can get away with eight players. You can't shuffle in the discards, since they are so disproportionately high cards and that would make pat hands too strong.
I think Dan Rubenstein's suggestion is pbly best.
But in all honesty you must be playing w/ HORRIBLE players. I think this rarely comes up. maybe you could educate them a little, (eg Calling a raise cold and then drawing 5 is pbly not a good idea, and i cna't believe telling them a little will hrut you that much, i doubt you should ever draw more than 2 unless you are the blind if you play). I understand you are trying to beat them out of money but even the weakest lowball games ive seen have not had this pb.
I'm interested in reading up on no- and pot-limit poker strategy. I see that both Ciaffone and Cloutier have books on the subject. Which one is better?
Jon I.
Ciaffone's book is a good introduction to no-limit and pot-limit *holdem* and to the general theory of pot-limit play. The chapters on tournaments and on other games (PL Omaha, PL Omaha-8...) are very weak. If you are a complete novice to big-bet play, you'll find it helpful. But if you have some experience with NL/PL holdem, you probably don't need it since it only really covers basic concepts.
Haven't read the Cloutier book, but the general consensus is that the Ciaffone book is better. Some people like the "Supersystem" chapter on no-limit holdem, written by Doyle Brunson.
I am a complete novice to big-bet play, so I think I'll give Ciaffone a try. Thanks.
Read them both. They each have strong points and show how to handle different situations. I felt like I got more out of the PL section of Ciaffone's book and more out of the NL section of TJ's (the discussion of A-K alone is worth much more than the price of the book).
I played a PLO hand a couple of days ago in a rotation PLHE/PLO game. It was four handed, and as usual with my friends we played tourney freezout. Each player started with T100000, blinds were 500-500-1000 for the PLO and 1000-2000 for the PLHE. This hand came up fairly late on in the tourney--one guy had been eliminated (and therefore demoted to bartender :-)), I had around T150000, my friend Player A(who I play h2h with) had about the same, a little less as I turned out, and the other guy had around T100000. Blinds were now 3000-6000 playing PLO--we converted to two blinds when it came three handed. I was in the sb and I saw KsTc9s8c. Not the best hand, but three handed it could be that bad. (I had earlier, I tell the truth, dealt myself four deuces). Player A on the button raised to 15000, and I just knew (I've played with him for years) he was on a pure steal. I flat-called, wanting to let the button in because I didn't want to play my hand heads-up against a load of junk. If I hit a flop I wanted to get paid off. As I suspected, he called. The flop came JQ4. Player A bet out another 25000. I called again, and the bb passed. I thought maybe he had hit a freakish two pair, but I wasn't sure. The turn was the 9s giving me the nuts. He checked, I checked. The river paired the four. He bet out 30000, I reraised all-in, he called and turned over 4473 offsuit. I was down to T14000 (though I did work it up to 150K and eventually made a 60-40 deal). My question is, s there anyway I could have avoided massacring my stack on this hand? Also, not knowing his hand but suspecting as I did that he had junk in the hole, would you have cheked the turn?
Regards,
Richard
Preflop, I agree with your call. I wouldn't raise, since you don't want to be all-in with this hand against an overpair. I wouldn't fold, since this hand is quite playable with 10:1 implied odds and position.
On the flop, two pair is quite possible. He could also have an overpair or a draw. Given the shorthandedness of the game he could be on a cold bluff, but this is unlikely from a good player on a connected board against two opponents. If the board is rainbow, you're in good or decent shape against almost anything he could have. Why not raise the full pot? He should fold anything short of trips (or a very strong draw), and against trips you're about 50-50.
On the turn, you have to bet. Why give him a free draw to a full house? If he has shite like AA he's not going to call on the river either.
On the river, be wary of raising when a higher class of hand is possible, even shorthanded. If all he had was trip fours, he would likely check. And even if he would bet A4, he wouldn't call an all-in raise. What weaker hands will call your raise here? He could easily have made a FH. Also, what is your read of his 30K bet into a 95K pot? If he's definitely either (1) bluffing, or (2) betting a FH, you should call, not raise.
Had you raised full-pot on the flop, you would have been all-in with 16 outs twice - about 50% equity. But consider that against many other betting hands that he could have had, you would have picked up a considerable pot with a raise there.
Had you bet the full pot on the turn, a good player would fold. Having called on the flop, you almost certainly have a draw. Since any wrap around that flop includes at least KT or T8, he's clearly facing the straight, and he would fold there.
And on the river, a check-call would have saved the rest of your stack.
Dan Rubenstein, a.k.a. "Iceman"
DR: Preflop, I agree with your call. I wouldn't raise, since you don't want to be all-in with this hand against an overpair. I wouldn't fold, since this hand is quite playable with 10:1 implied odds and position.
RG: I knew he didn’t have an overpair, I was pretty sure he was stealing.
DR: On the flop, two pair is quite possible. He could also have an overpair or a draw. Given the shorthandedness of the game he could be on a cold bluff, but this is unlikely from a good player on a connected board against two opponents.
RG: He’s a reasonable player, but like me, Omaha is not his best game. The atmosphere was fairly light and he was playing fast—he could well have been on a bluff here.
DR: If the board is rainbow, you're in good or decent shape against almost anything he could have. Why not raise the full pot? He should fold anything short of trips (or a very strong draw), and against trips you're about 50-50.
RG: Basically, I wanted to take his whole stack. If he folded here he would still have had >100K. I thought by dicing with danger and slowplaying I would get paid off with most or all of his stack. Equally, he would not have passed two pair in this spot.
DR: On the turn, you have to bet. Why give him a free draw to a full house? If he has shite like AA he's not going to call on the river either.
RG: Basically, there was 95000 in the pot. Both of us had over 100K left. If I bet the turn in a big way I was sure he would pass. If I bet a small amount he would smell a trap. By checking I thought he would bet his two pair for most of his stack on the end.
DR: On the river, be wary of raising when a higher class of hand is possible, even shorthanded. If all he had was trip fours, he would likely check. And even if he would bet A4, he wouldn't call an all-in raise. What weaker hands will call your raise here? He could easily have made a FH. Also, what is your read of his 30K bet into a 95K pot? If he's definitely either (1) bluffing, or (2) betting a FH, you should call, not raise.
RG: This is where, in thinking carefully about the hand, I think I made an error. By calling his 30K I still have about 80K left. I read him for two pair, and when the card came that would, assuming I was right, and I was reasonably sure I was, beat me, I didn’t alter my strategy accordingly.
DR: Had you raised full-pot on the flop, you would have been all-in with 16 outs twice - about 50% equity. But consider that against many other betting hands that he could have had, you would have picked up a considerable pot with a raise there.
RG: As I said, I was trying to take his whole stack in the one hand.
DR: Had you bet the full pot on the turn, a good player would fold. Having called on the flop, you almost certainly have a draw. Since any wrap around that flop includes at least KT or T8, he's clearly facing the straight, and he would fold there.
RG: But assuming he has two pair, and I think he will bet this two pair on the end even if he doesn’t improve, why would I want him to fold? I win more than I lose by letting him see the river. My mistake was moving in when according to my previous analysis it was fairly likely I was beaten. Against a player who will only bet if he fills up, your decision is correct. But I was sure he would bet on the end whether he improved or not.
DR: And on the river, a check-call would have saved the rest of your stack.
RG: He was to act first, remember. But I agree my raise was a mistake. Thanks for the analysis—this is why I posted the hand. I thought I had made a mistake, but wasn’t exactly sure what it was. Now I am. Regards, Richard
You should have raised the flop at least enough to cut off gut-shots to bigger straights and two pair.
On the turn, you have to bet. Omaha is not Holdem, and your hand is not strong enough to give away a free card. Bet enough again to make it wrong to call you with two pair or a set.
On the river when the board pairs, you shouldn't have raised. What were you thinking with the raise? If your opponent was bluffing, he's not going to call. You certainly aren't getting a better hand to fold.
You should have won this pot. And given that you played the flop and turn the way you did, you shouldn't have lost as many chips on the river.
On reflection, and after reading DR's post, I agree with all of this. I'll just go stick my head in the oven now :-)
Regards,
Richard
Well Badger, Omaha is not my best game, and it is yours, so naturally I respect your opinion. I would appreciate specific guidance on which element of my thinking and/or play was wrong. Flat-calling pre-flop? Calling the flop? Checking the turn? Moving in on the river? The fact is, he flopped trips, I flopped a big straight draw. I then checked the nuts, which maybe was a mistake, given that I thought he had two pair, and then moved in--in retrospect that was a mistake. I'd appreciate an analysis of how my play was terrible from the word "go". More specifically, three handed the nut straight, even with the board paired, is a strong holding.
Regards,
Richard
SB: Preflop: You are out of position with a weak hand. Muck.
RG: I disagree with this point. Wait!! I’m about to agree with most of the others.
SB: Preflop(2): "because I didn't want to play my hand heads-up against a load of junk." Huh? I don't know what else in poiker you would want to do if not this!!!
RG: Basically I was hoping the flop would hit at least two of us and I would come out best. A case of inexperience telling, I guess.
SB: Preflop(3): "If I hit a flop I wanted to get paid off." Greed kills. You play passively in hopes your opponents will fuck up later? Yes, most players suck and will make mistakes, but that's hardly a reason to be in a pot.
RG: I’m not quite sure what to make of this, to be honest.
SB: Preflop(4): Being heads up, particularly in PLO, is almost always the best thing for a good player. Controlling the betting is important.
RG: Again, inexperience telling.
SB: Flop: You check the flop. Why? It's a great flop for you, about as good as you could hope for... like a 90 on a scale of 1 to 100.
RG: I didn’t check the flop. I called his bet.
SB: Flop(2): He bets 25,000 into a 45,000, and you don't *want* come over the top for all your chips? Raise, and hopefully take this nice pot right here. As it turns out, if he calls you with bottom set you are a slight dog. If he calls with two pair you are a favorite, if he mucks that is great. You got greedy, again.
RG: I thought I could trap him for all his stack (sob). I was playing the opponent, not playing textbook pot limit Omaha. I didn’t think he would call me with two pair, and I was more or less certain that he didn’t have a set—if he did, being relatively new to Omaha like me he would most probably have checked it. If I waited then I knew he would bet the river for most of his stack whether he improved or not.
SB: Turn: You make the nuts and give him a free card. Pure greed. bet and take it, or let him call when he is a dog. Either is okay... giving him a free card in hopes *he* will make a mistake later (instead of giving him a chance to make a mistake now), well that's a terrible play.
RG: Did I say “in hopes”? I’m not sure. If I did then I will rephrase-- I KNEW he would make a mistake later. I KNEW he would bet two pair for most of his stack on the end. I KNEW he would fold two pair if I bet.
SB: River: We should never be here, but raising with a paired board is foolish.
RG: This I agree with—see my response to DR’s and DH’s posts. This was foolish, and I won’t attempt to defend it because I know that when you are in a hole is a good time to quit digging.
SB: Again, you made a mistake on every street, apparently mostly due to greed. PLO with limited stacks in a tournament is not about big trap hands to get all their chips, it's about winning pots without showdowns and/or making players call without pot odds. Greed and "hoping" should not be a part of it.
RG: As I have said several times in this thread, Omaha is not my best game, and I haven’t played it much at a high level. I am attempting to learn the finer points of the game. Therefore I sincerely appreciate this analysis (harsh though it is :-))
Regards,
Richard
To be honest I don't have the action clear in my head anymore, so I can't make any definite statement regarding that. As for the rest of it, I can't help but agree.
Regards,
Richard
can anyone direct me to a site that would give me some insites to the strategy of razz.
jg
jg -- Just get Sklansky's _Sklansky on Poker_. The back portion of it is "Sklansky on Razz", which is a compact but thorough discussion of razz strategy.
Yeah, it's too bad Razz isn't played much anymore, (so that prople would read that part of the book) because David digs right in to the guts of that game. In fact I should be reading it right now instead of typing.
;^)
CV
Believe it or not but The Bellagio has been getting a razz game. This afternoon when I was playing they started a $30-$60 game. On other days when I have been there they have been playing $15-$30 razz (with a $2 ante). For those of you who don't know, against terrible players, razz is a great game to win money at. Against reasonably good players, you don't have much of an edge assuming that you are an expert.
.
Hi,
I am a relatively new O/8 player and the game I am playing in is extremely loose. It's a 5/10 dealer's choice game (10 people) and last night it was averaging 6 - O/8 games, 1 - Omaha High game, and 3 - Texas Holdem games per orbit. For the Omaha High and O/8 games 7 players were seeing the flop on average (seriously). It seems there are always a few players in each pot that stay far too long with second best low draws and high draws (although I am very new, this was my impression).
Anyways, I've read Ciaffone's book and Ray Zee's book but I'm still fuzzy on what types of hands I should be looking for in an O/8 game like this. I played rather tight last night and came out ahead $145 after 4.5 hours of play (although I only won around 5 or 6 pots and one was split 3 way and another I only won low).
I am trying to get a better grasp on what types of hands I should be playing (I am going to thoroughly review Ray Zee's and Bob Ciaffone books), but I thought you guys could give me some help. Remember the type of game I am talking about. BTW, how should I deal with an A3xx hand in a game like this? And should an A2xx cold call a preflop raise if I can expect >5 players to see the flop?
$145 profit in 4.5 hours at 5/10 is really, really good. Whatever you're doing, don't change.
Well thank you very much for the compliment, but a profit of $145 for a single session of 4.5 hrs shouldn't be unreasonable should it? If anything, I thought it might be a bit on the low-side for a winning session at 5/10.
Maybe someone (Mason?) can fill me in on the details of what I should expect for profit in a winning session and what I should expect for losses in a losing session? I would also be very interesting in learning about this.
4.5 hours means nothing in terms of the long run. You only start getting into the long run after a few hundred hours (actually it depends on the game, skill of opponents, agressivenes/passiveness etc....). Lin Shermans remark of whatever you're doing don't change is totally unfounded. Maybe you are playing excellent poker, but after 4.5 hours there is no way to know that. I don't know if you said this was a home game, but from my experience if it is full of weak players you could probably make 2 to 2.5 big bets per pour in the long run. The reason you can make more in a home game of this limit is (obviously) because you no longer have to pay drop and tips. It would be impossible to make this much in a casino.In a casino you will be making about 1 BB per hour if you are a good player (this again depends on skill of opponents and amount of house drop). If you want a great book on what you can earn and what your ups and downs can be in poker pick up Gambling Theory and Other Topics. This book will explain what one can expect in terms of short term and long run results.
Yah, I forgot to mention that it was a casino game.
I only have a few hours with the players (it's a small town so the players are mainly regulars I'm told), but my impression is that most of them are very bad.
The game in question is 5/10, with 5% rake up to a max of $5 (which is usually taken) and a $1 jackpot drop at a pot size of $125 (again, this is usually taken in O/8 and Omaha High).
There were many pots in excess of 20 big bets. More than 50%, I'd say that it was approaching 75%.
Goat: Lin Shermans remark of whatever you're doing don't change is totally unfounded.
Not really. You are right about not being able to predict longer-term results on the basis of one session. However, as long as Mark is winning, especially if he is winning spectacularly, he should NOT change what he is doing unless he is certain that it will improve his game. That's just common sense.
First off I don't want to imply that Mark is one of these types of players, but haven't you seen players that are super loose (like seeing 80% of flops, calling w/one overcard, draw to any backdoor flush or straight etc...) go on tremendous winning streaks? This happens frequently. I have seen it and anybody who plays a lot of poker sees it almost everyday. Are you trying to tell me that these people shouldn't change the way they play?????????????? The common sense of poker is to constantly work on your game, and not just do the same thing because you happen to have been on a winning streak. Making mistakes that get you lucky for a particular session must be recognized and corrected, otherwise (if big enough) they could turn you into a loser.
Kris
Making any kind of determination on the basis of 4 plus hours of play is completely worthless. After all, from his description of the game winning one less pot means he would actually be down instead of up.
Lin Sherman said:
"$145 profit in 4.5 hours at 5/10 is really, really good. Whatever you're doing, don't change."
$14,500 in 450 hours is really good. $145 is one smallish pot in a loose/passive $5/10.
Goat said: "In a casino you will be making about 1 BB per hour if you are a good player (this again depends on skill of opponents and amount of house drop)."
If opponents are weak, you should do better.
Lin Sherman said: "However, as long as Mark is winning, especially if he is winning spectacularly," (snip)
What if he just sat down, won a $145 pot and quit? Would that make him the best Omaha player in the world? $145 is just one pot! Judging by what you folks think is a spectacular win...or a nice sized pot, I must be playing in the right $3/6 kill game. I see many $300+ pots in the course of a day. We had a $500+ the other day but all I could do was watch from the sidelines. Yes, I take bigger swings in a game like this but 2 BB/hr is a workable average.
Hey, I know you're not knocking me, and I'm not sure if I mentioned this but I haven't played a lot of poker. I have about 75 hrs of play and about 65 hours are just for holdem.
After tonight's session ($297 in 5 hrs at Dealer's Choice) I am $6.95/hr overall (74.5 hrs), $8.62/hr at dealer's choice (13 hrs), and $6.49/hr at Holdem (61.5 hrs).
All of my holdem hours were played at the 3/6 level (no kill), except 2.5 hrs, which were played at 5/10.
I know this doesn't mean a lot (small sample size), but it should give you guys a little bit better estimation of my skill. I think I am an OK player with a lot of room for improvement in all aspects of my play.
Comments on these stats (or anything else I said) are welcome and appreciated.
You sound like you are off to a good start. Marc Gilutin is correct that you can indeed make more then 1BB per hour, but 2BB is probably about the max(once again it depends on opponents play and drop, in some games this should be not too tough to accomplish, but in games like 30-60 you will be super hard-pressed to even make 1BB per hour). Good luck......
Mark,
If you can afford it, get Wilson's program Turbo Texas O8. It has a neat counting system for hi & low hands which allows you to play very tight and know pretty well what to do, pretty automatically. I like it a lot.
Mark
I've played in a home game similar to this for about ten years. When you have several players gambling with less than nut hands, I believe you should loosen your starting hand requirements, but tighten your play after you see what develops on the flop. Generally, in these games the best hand showing on the board is most likely in play (if there are three of a suit, gurantee a flush is made, if there's a pair a full house is made). So, in my mind the key is reading the hands, knowing what the nuts are. Don't bluff, it's futile. Aggressive play without a powerhouse will simply increase your swings. In games like this you will get sucked out on A LOT. Simply raise when you have the nuts. Be conservative with hands that are not five card hands (trips, two pair). Expect most pots to be won by straights or better. In answer to your question, yes I would play any A-2 for a raise. The A-3 I wuld also play in an unraised pot. If the pot was raised My A-3 would need a little help. I've been able to average $12/hour over ten years in a 5-10 game with a full kill.
Hey ratso, it's not that much of a bad beat since you almost put a bad beat on his rolled up trips.
Hope that only happens once in a few thousand hands.
If you mean losing to quads, I don't know how often that's supposed to happen, but it's happened to me a few times in the past month alone. In the last 500 hours of play, I'd say I've lost to quads at least 6 or 7 times, both in stud and in hold'em. Is losing to quads supposed to be that rare? Cause I feel like I run into quads fairly regularly.
natedogg
I think he should have played the rolled up trips (6's) a bit faster. Too much chance of a 4th player in the pot hitting a straight/flush/higher trips. Interesting note that after Sunday, he was going to the Bahamas to play. The irony was that he is a high roller Craps player who just wanted to sit down for a while and relax. After 1 hr he had amassed about $1200. He was calling with single low and mid pairs and winning. Smart player. he read cards well.
one of my first ten hands playing on Paradise Poker tonight: I lose with kings full of nines to four nines.
I seem to come up against quads a lot!
natedogg
Ratso,
My father says: "you can't beat the cards." I often wonder if he is right.
Rockhard
In the home games we play, we recently adding the 2-7 draw game like they play in the WSOP. Do they play that game at any casinos? I don't think I have seen any straight low ball games at casinos except in tournaments. If they do, what are the limits?
Ken
Deuce is always played NL, and can be found (according to Hellmuth in his HLR) in the high stakes games he and the other pros play. It's a real big money game, so I shouldn't expect to find many games.
Regards, Richard
I saw Johnny Chan and O'Neal Longson playing heads-up 100-200 blind no limit deuce to seven a couple weeks ago at the Commerce. I'm sure if you wanted they'd let you join their game.
Hmmmm. I think I will pass. I was hoping for a slightly lower limit.
Ken
I believe 2-7 lowball is always played no limit. Other than that I can't add anything else.
..during the WSOP Russ Hamilton was playing a mixed game including triple draw(another first for 2-7, at least first time I've seen it) 2-7 where the betting was 100-400 spread limit, along with t.d. A-5 and PLO. I do think 2-7 would play better NL and single draw, but I've never played it any other way.
I used to play a home game where we rotated NL2-7, PLO & NLHE; .25-.50 blinds. God, those games are so much more fun than the 10-20 grind....
I wish the Orleans and LA clubs would hold some lower buy-in, limited rebuy, "second chance" 2-7 tourneys the afternoons of their big LHE and O8 events to introduce the game to new players, but I'm probably just dreaming.
If I had to choose only one WSOP event to 'railbird', it'd be the 2-7.
In a tough 7s8 game. Am dealt two live kings with ks as my door card and the 2s in the hole. 4 brings it in low card fold, low card fold, $20 on the action button (a 9), I raise to $40, the Ace of clubs to my immediately left calls (tight player, but pretty unimaginative unagressive) and everyone else folds.
I catch a spade on my next card and bet 20, Ac catches an offsuit 3 and calls. I catch some blank on fifth street and Ace catches an offsuit 10. Bet 40 he calls. I think to myself if he catches a low card or other threatening card and I don't significantly improve, I check and call on 6th street. However, he catches the 5clubs on 6th but I catch another spade (my spades were totally live but one at this point.) I say, well hell, I have a flush draw now, let's bet it.
Of course he raises me, and bets $30 on the river (all - in) and I call him because I made two pairs.
Fold on sixth to his raise? he has a freeroll for high and probably a low locked up. Check and call on 6 and 7? fold on 3? Give up 7s8 because I don't know what I'm doing? Never play in a tough game?
Whaddya think?
learn more about the game.
since he didnt reraise you know he must be drawing for low or is rolled up(unlikely). if he would not reraise with aces he is a bad player to let a low draw in. on 6th he has aces,acesup or a made low. you have kings with a flush draw. you should check and call. since you bet you must call to the end and get half or lose it all if you dont improve.
plus you should not have bet at him on 4th street after he checked.
On 5th, after he checked it a second time (supposing he did check it a second time) should I bet into his (temporarily) busted low? What if he bets on 5th after I check behind?
If he checkraised me on 4th, should I throw it away? (This was part of the plan I had in regards to betting on 4th, actually.)
I will keep re-reading your book, which I have found to be excellent. I am using what I learn from there to post some wins at this game (including in this session, although the hand did take a substantial chunk of my winnings away.)
when you are going in what looks like the opposite direction from what your opponent is going, most times you just have to call the hand down and take your lumps after you have built the pot up too much to go out.
Hmm I don't like it when the Ac cold calls on third. I suspect I would not want to get involved w/ K's against an A. If he doesn't have A's he could hit them later and you are in big trouble. Maybe bc he's an unimaginative player you could play but depending on eht ante maybe just folding on 3rd isn't such bad idea.
YOu don't explain what happened to the action player (9) did he fold on 4th?
Unless you are pretty sure he a)has not made his low, and b) doesn't have A's I wouldn't bet on 6th. Seems to me he might now have a low and a flush draw, maybe its seems too weak to check and call on 6th, but there is a decent chance he's way ahead on the high ( w/ A's up), or has a freeroll, (he has made his low and now is trying to hit his straight or flush).
I don't think you should quit 7/8stud, maybe just get more experience. However Im not sure how profitable a tought 7/8stud game is....
I'm confused by the action...did you have a pair showing here? Otherwise, I'm confused by you checking, because it seems he should be acting first. Did he checkraise you on 6th street? If he checked to me here I'd probably bet the hand as well, unless he was someone who checkraises alot with hands like that.
He did checkraise on 6th. He was first to act.
OK, that makes sense then. I think you played the hand fine, except I don't think you can bet after he checks to you on 4th, I prefer checking behind him. On 6th I'd take him for a pair and 4 low cards when he checks to you, and I'd bet my kings into him. I don't think I've ever seen someone checkraise in this type of situation in 8 or better so that would have surprised me too. If he's someone who checkraises alot in this situation I think checking behind him on 6th is much safer, but without knowing the player, I'd bet it here. After he checkraises you almost have to call him down.
I am just curious as to what games, if any you played this year in the WSOP, and what hands you considered to be key hands in the Main Event. I think it would be a good lesson to many of us, especially to those who are new to high limit/no limit players.
Pat
skipped going the last two years, even though i was there for the first one held. 1970. i am hard pressed anymore to attend places where the person sitting next to me can blow smoke in my face and i must take it. but i might go to the east coast non smoking rooms this winter and will go play in high stakes games in california. i was planning for arizona but i hear they are going back to smoking.
Here is a strange hand because on 5th Str. I didn't know where I was at.
On 3rd Str I'm 2nd to act after the Bring in with (JhTh)Td. The Qh Folds, behind me I have the: Ah; Qs; Qc; 8h; Ts. The Bring-in is the 3d. Not the most live hand I've had, but seeing the Queens were dead and only the one Ace was behind me I decided to raise. The only caller was the Bring-in.
On 4th I'm lucky enough to catch the Jd. My opponent catches a live 6c. I bet and he calls. Now on 5th he makes an open pair of 6's with the 6d, and I catch the 4d. He now bets into me? This is strange because I would have bet if he checked. Is he afraid that I'm going to check? Should I raise? I didn't because I have been seeing him play small pairs small kicker a lot. I think that I may be up agianst Trips, or more likely two small pair. Since it was already heads up I just chose to call rather than raise to see what 6th Street brought. He caught the 5d, I made open 4's and he still bet into me.
I called him all the way down, he bet the river and I just called with my unimproved Jacks-Up.
I feel that even though I might have been up against Trips I could have gotten a value raise in somewhere.
Comments?
Thanks, CV
Thinking about it some more I probably should have raised on 5th since it looks like I may have made a Flush with 3 Diamonds on board. Trips probably won't re-raise.
CV
My guess is that he called you with a 3-flush on 3rd street (maybe 3-straight also?), bet the open pair as a semi-bluff for deception purposes on 5th, then made his flush on 6th street so he kept betting. You never had much of a "value raise" in there because even if you raised on 5th, he still has an easy call. This is always the hazard of raising with a medium split pair, in that the opposition usually has a good idea where you are at (particularly since you were partially dead on the 10s), while you are not sure where they are.
Raising a paired door card is risky especially when he has bet into you. Of course having 2 overpairs to his 6's is nice. You are not going to bluff trips out of a hand. If he has the best hand (assuming 50% chance of trip sixes with a live draw to a boat and quads) you do not want to raise. I would stay to the river since your possible full house (if you need it will beat his). Of course, I would rather have trips than 2 pair on 5th street. As for the flush/straight draw, I would not worry about it.
"On 4th I'm lucky enough to catch the Jd. My opponent catches a live 6c. I bet and he calls. Now on 5th he makes an open pair of 6's with the 6d, and I catch the 4d."
No paired door card.
paul
thought the 6 paired the door card....never mind
As it turns out the player had 6's and 5's with 75 in the Hole, hence my second guessing. Lucky for me I kept catching the 4's for his Gut Shot Straight.
Me: (Jh,Th)Td,Jd,4d,4h,(Ac)
Him: (7s,5c)3d,6c,6d,5d,(Ad)
Maybe he thought we were playing Hi/Lo? ;^) I understand where you are coming from Earl. If he was a thinking player I was in Bad shape.
Thanks,
CV
We should all be so lucky as to have players like that in our games. As a few writers have observed before about bad players: it's difficult for you to put them on a hand, because they don't even know what they have.
What level was this game? At a low level, you can assume that he is not really a thinking player. No one in their right mind would play a 3st with low cards heads up, unless as a steal. It is a difficult decision since you do not really know what he has. BUT,if he had a high pair he probably would have raised coming in, even if he were not a strong player, especially since you had a 10 showing and three q's were dead. So you must put him on a draw or absolutely nothing, if he was a bad player.
A raise on fifth street is the correct play, I think, since you are likely a favorite. If there is th epossibility that he is trying to bluff or set up a bluff then you are a big favorite.
He's MUCH more likely to have one pair or two pair than trips. I would wait until 6th to raise, what the heck, unless something strange happend like I make an open pair and he STILL bets into me.
- Louie
Sitting on the button in a moderately loose 10 handed game. Usually a raise in this game is semi-legit, but players will call the blind bet with junk. My hand was As2s3dKc. Obviously very good starting hand. 3 or 4 callers, then the player two to my right raises pre-flop.
Question 1: Should I reraise or just call? Had this player not raised, I certainly would have, but reraising may push out those people I want chasing me if the flop comes low, so I just called. Flop is 6 or 7 handed.
Flop comes 3-8-K rainbow. The original raiser had all high cards, so he did not bet. I bet the flop, turn, and river and scooped with my two pair and nut low - nothing remarkable.
Question 2: If the original raiser had had low cards (presumably A2xx), and had bet the flop, should I raise in order to isolate against him with the idea of winning 3/4? Or should I call in order to entice the worse low draws to hang around?
I just call before the flop; no reason to jam the pot until you see the board. If you raise, all you are doing is increasing your variance and putting the field on alert that you probably have A-2. They've done the dirty work for you, so you can lay in the weeds and snap off anyone who thinks their A-3 or A-4 low might be good on the river. Along that same thought, I don't think you force any A-2 hands out, but maybe worse Aces that might've called a double-bet.
As far as the post-flop action, if the original raiser had A-2, would he have bet the low draw only? And if he did bet and you raised, would you have been sure of getting 3/4s? What happens if you run into a set and the low doesn't get there? I think the raise is not necessarily a bad idea, because you have so many outs, but I would be more inclined to raise in order to find out if I'm beat for high rather than to narrow the field.
AX,
I like the smooth call before the flop for the reason you mention.
Had I been led into on the flop, I think it is an easy raise with the nut low draw and two pair. You want to maximize your chances of a scoop in the low does not come and you should be ahead of the pre flop raiser for high with two pair.
Regards,
Rick
anytime there is a fair amount of dead money in there getting it headup is always a good option unless you have a hand thats unusually powerful. with your hand there arent many hands that you would not want to play headup with when having last position.
Are you saying that a reraise is correct pre-flop or that a raise is correct post flop or both?
i wasnt there but if i could get it headup i would raise early on. after the flop your hand may be worth jamming or not depending on what your assessments are.
Question 1: IMO it's almost never right to raise to the 3-level in limit O/8. You might as well just expose your hand right there. It may get a bit more money in the pot now, but it will put a damper on later-round action. Besides, you don't have a good enough hand. If the K were suited to the 3, then you have a 3-bet, if you felt it was the right play.
Question 2: I personally almost never raise on the flop unless I have the nut high and a redraw, or a fairly counterfeit-proof *made* nut low and a redraw for a good high hand. In this case, you've got cheese: a 5th nut two pair with poor redraws and a four-card low with one of your cards duplicated. Don't fall in love with it.
First: A reraise before the flop would be silly, tantamount to turning your hand faceup. In fact, I advocate never raising before the flop in O/8 at all!! Second: Your hand ain't all that good. You don't exactly have the nuts for high; you can't expect top/bottom two pair to hold up unless it hits a full, and it loses even then some of the time. On the low side, you haven't made your hand yet, and you're half counterfeited. You need a 4,5,6,7 to win the low half (or half of the low half, which is a distinct possibility) WITHOUT an A or 2 coming as well. The raise would make a lot more sense if the board's 3 had been a 4 or 5 since you now have "counterfeit insurance" (a 6 or 7 has the same function but increases the chances of straights, killing your two pair).
The responses to question 2 (raising after the flop) seem to be evenly divided which makes me think that Zee's answer (it depends on your read) is probably closest to the truth. However, to all those who said absolutely No, I would like to pose the following lemma: Imagine you were in this game in middle position with A336(Ace-suited) and you got trapped for a raise behind you. Now the flop comes as described in my original post - you have bottom set (and maybe a backdoor flush draw). Are you going to cold call a bet and raise?
Perhaps even more interesting was that only Zee seems in favor of a reraise before the flop(question 1). My explanation for this (and Zee is invited to correct me if he disagrees) is that we all play for relatively low stakes where the rake is a significant percentage of the pots (for example, my max stakes is 15-30). However Zee plays for big stakes, where the rake is not a significant percentage of the pot. Therefore, he is willing to allow a modest reduction of his expectation in order to reduce his variance.
Comments are welcome.
Ratso,
How live is his hand? He can have 3*3 + 1 cards that beat you, and you have 1 card to redraw. Let's ignore the redraw. I don't know how good your card counting is, but I suspect there are 21 or more unknown cards left. This means you are a favorite to win the pot.
This is pretty clear - you MUST bet. He cannot have you beat yet, and you are a favorite to remain on top. Who cares if he doesn't fold?
I hear there are some monster games of PL 5cs being played in Moscow these days, which goes to show, you can't keep a good game down forever. Here is my candidate for the ultmate development of the one-live-hole-card form: I am going out on a limb here and renaming it zanetti stud - I earlier gave it another name, but no one took any notice, so what the hell. It's five card stud with an extra half-live hole-card to start, and an extra card dealt at the second round making six live cards in all.
Zanetti stud: (1,1)1+2+1+1. Deal the cards exactly as for mississippi, but only one hole-card is live. So you get two hole-cards and one upcard to start, then a two card individual flop, the a turn and river. No communal cards, and only one hole-card is live.
This gives you excellent chances of starting with a pair, and excellent chances (17%) ofimproving it at the second round. Because there are six live cards at the end there are long-shot straight and flush chances too. If no pair is showing then a pair of the highest card showing is unbeatable. In order to have a full house, either two-pair or trips must be exposed. To have a straight or flush, four of the required cards must be showing. Whatever you do, don't turn the last card down!
I play 5-10 7cs and this problem seems to come up a lot in the games I play. I raise on third street with either two queens, kings, or aces. One person calls. His board doesn't look threatening through sixth street and I'm betting all the way and he's calling. On the river, I don't catch the two pair. I put him on two small pair. First of all, when should I stop betting into him if I don't catch two pair? Fifth street, sixth street, the river? The way that I've been playing it is I bet the whole way and check on the river. I figure that if he called me on sixth street, he'll call on the river and I mind as well save a bet. Are the statistics with me to continue to bet all the way through the hand?
Any responses would be appreciated.
i dont put them on two pair unless i get raised or i see the open pair. then i make my decision on when to continue or not. if i think he has an under pair i bet all the way thru 6th st. all the time. on the river if he will call with one pair ill bet no matter what i catch. if he will fold one or two pair ill bet as a bluff with one pair. if he will bet two pair if i check and not bluff ill always check and fold or raise. if he bets two pair and folds to a checkraise ill only checkraise bluff. on and on with the rest of the possibilities.
Thanks for the response Ray.
I have a further question. If you get raised by something like 9 6 off showing on fourth street and you think that this person will make this play if he has two pair or if you see an open pair signifying two pair how long do you continue with your overpair? I'm sure it depends on how live your cards are. How live do they have to be?
Sorry to throw so many questions out at once but this sort of thing strikes me as one of the more frustrating parts of 7cs and I've been losing to two small pair a lot lately.
Can you really put a player's strategy in such specific categories? This must be why you are a world class player and I'm struggling to get past 10/20.
Just wondering if part of the reason you are known to be such a great player is that the area of Reading hands came easy to you?
CV
no, reading hands is agonizing for me at times. when i get in a game i look at each player and generalize how they play and refine it from there as i watch the hands they play and the ones they dont. as you play alot with the same players you can put them in catagories that really do match their play. people change from hand to hand and thats the part that you need to get right. even when i have no idea what they have i can tell you if they like their hand or not and that is enough most times to make the best play.
This is a good question because this is the most common situation for solid players. I've been betting through 5th (assuming no open pairs or raises) and checking 6th. If he bets, I can put him on 2 pair, a big hand he's been slow playing, or a bluff depending on the player. But,if he checks, I usually bet the river. If he didn't improve, I'll beat a lower pair. I've had people show me two smaller pair as they fold them, assuming I hit my second pair on the river. Over all, I think this works better than betting 6th and checking the river. Your plan never gives the other guy the chance to fold the winner.
DJ
Even if the initial raise reduced the pot to twohanded the final bet offers 10-1 odds. Therefore your opponent can--and probably should--call with one unimproved pair at that point. I would definitely bet Aces for value, probably Kings too, maybe also Queens. You lose very little if he indeed has two pair because if you check he will often bet them, and you will be forced to call anyway because of the aforementioned pot odds.
Never do anything automatically. You have to ask yourself what you think he has. Is he drawing to a strong hand? Does he have a big pair in the hole or even trips? Are his cards live? Is your pair split and therefore obvious? Why would he call into an obvious big pair? If he knows what you have, what does he think you think he has? If someone is calling you down to the river, there has to be a reason. You've got to get into that player's head. If you think he has a smaller pair, you can keep betting. If you think he has two smaller pair, you can bet or check until you get that second pair. If you think he's drawing, determine what he's drawing two and keep betting until you think he has made his hand. Semi-bluffing on the end may cost you an extra bet, but if you pick your spots, it my prove profitable. All of this is easier said than done.
Picking up pots from missed draws is one of my favorite things to do. If a scary looking board checks to your weak board and just calls your bet, you can often pick up a good sized pot with trash when he misses.
4-8 with 1/2 kill live game during big O/8 Battle of the Bay tournament this week @ Lucky Chances. Very very good game, but very volital(spelling?). Two extremely live maniacs raising with nothing and everything. Most hands seen 7 ways. I see very few hands and usually pick my spots. Mostly late position but a few blinds hands too.
My hand 1 off button in kill pot. I have AAKQ double suited. Both maniacs raise befreo flop and it gets capped after I limp-call for 7 way action.
Flop is As,Jd,3d
I've flopped top set, nut diamond draw, nut straight draw.
It's 2 bets to me with 3 callers in front and 2 checkers. SHOULD I RAISE? I flat call looking to get the checkers back in the pot and pounce on turn if I still have the nuts. All call then it gets threebet & capped. No prob I'm hidden.
Turn is 8c
It's 1 bet to me both the maniacs had bet & raise. I believe it was 1 more gone at this point. The Player to my left a pretty solid player starts to muck and then suddenly decides to cold call 2 bets again. well this round gets capped for 5 way action.
river is the 10h
Well I'm sure with all my heart that the small blind has nut low. I've seen his play enuf to be sure. I've decided that this ten is one of 3 tens that can 1/4 me so I flat call and the guy behind me raises! Small blind fears 1/4 so he flat calls. I turn over my hand saying how slim he was drawing for a gut shot to tie with no outs to win in the deck. I of course call only and 1/4 the high.
I'm not known to play very aggressive but when I have it experienced players seem to get out of my way. I rarely rarely raise pre-flop in this game as it does nothing to thin field and often times get's em gambling even more. So I let others do it for me and look for my turn to put the pressure on. This game is full of very weak starting req's. Where did I go wrong or play less then optimal?....should I have fired earlier?.....I hate to admit it while I have read many books I have not read Ray Zee's on OMAHA. I usually just stick to good holdings and theory with pot odds.
Any comments?
Larry wrote:
"4-8 with 1/2 kill live game (snip) Very very good game, (snip) Two extremely live maniacs raising with nothing and everything. Most hands seen 7 ways. I see very few hands and usually pick my spots. Mostly late position but a few blinds hands too.
My hand 1 off button in kill pot. I have AAKQ double suited. Both maniacs raise befreo flop and it gets capped after I limp-call for 7 way action.
Flop is As,Jd,3d
I've flopped top set, nut diamond draw, nut straight draw.
It's 2 bets to me with 3 callers in front and 2 checkers. SHOULD I RAISE? "
Would your raise knock out the low draws? Probably not. Is there any question that the pot won't get capped? Ditto. IMO, call's ok.
"I flat call looking to get the checkers back in the pot and pounce on turn if I still have the nuts. All call then it gets threebet & capped. No prob I'm hidden.
Turn is 8c
It's 1 bet to me both the maniacs had bet & raise. I believe it was 1 more gone at this point. The Player to my left a pretty solid player starts to muck and then suddenly decides to cold call 2 bets again. well this round gets capped for 5 way action."
I don't understand what you said here but I would raise...no way these maniacs put you on your real hand.
"river is the 10h. Well I'm sure with all my heart that the small blind has nut low. I've seen his play enuf to be sure. I've decided that this ten is one of 3 tens that can 1/4 me so I flat call and the guy behind me raises! Small blind fears 1/4 so he flat calls. I turn over my hand saying how slim he was drawing for a gut shot to tie with no outs to win in the deck."
Big mistake. Don't get this guy thinking about what a bad play he made. Smile, give him a high sign and say 'I think we broke even, partner." He has no clue how much better your hand was than his...why wake him?
"I of course call only and 1/4 the high.
.....I hate to admit it while I have read many books I have not read Ray Zee's on OMAHA."
OK. Now you've admitted it. Go buy the book.
6-12 game today. 2 players that will raise w/anything! 45o doesn't matter. They will call after flop with under pairs, bottom pairs runner runner draws etc. 2 solid players, 1 player is breaking the tilt-o-meter, 2 loose callers, 1 very solid 40-80 player(no game) and myself. My image to those that pay attn is very tight, if I'm in there they slow down of "information" bet to check me out. I take advantage of this often when in correct position with semi-bluffs and get a few xtra pots.
ok, Mid pos, I have QQ and raise the limper. 1 Caller to the button and all blinds call.
Flop: J 4 3 rainbow
small blind loose caller(LC) bets out. 2 callers, I raise, button calls(maniac), SB calls Limper 3 bets! all call.
Turn 9 still rainbow:
BB now bets!, Limper calls, I pause, i think BB has J9o and Limper has J3 suited. I call, button mucks all call.
River 4
I follow the looks of disgust and all check to me. HAH I was right or so I think and Bet.
I get 2 callers and as I turn over cards say "J9 no good". I see J9 go in the muck along with another J but didnt see other card so I assume just a decent kicker.
SO; should I have played this stronger, slower, what about river, was this a bet that seems to be unprofitable in the long run?
Played perfectly, except I might have capped it (if you're in LA) on the flop (in Vegas I just smooth call, not wanting to get five bet.)
The bet on the river is a winner in the long run, I think, because by checking and with tells/intuition, it's pretty clear that you have the best two pair now. I make this one every time, and it's usually been profitable. However, when the board pairs and I have a set and make a full, I will (and I'm sure a lot of players will) check-raise. If you know your players well enough, you might be able to get away from this hand after the check-raise, but with the amount of cash in the pot, you probably still have to call.
BY THE WAY, THERE IS A WHOLE HOLDEM FORUM--THIS IS FOR "OTHER" POKER GAMES.
its a 6 12 stud game, and let me tell you the pot is pretty big, as it has been capped 3 way action almost every street.
im not happy. im at the river with quad 6's.
i was of course rolled up and caught a 6 on the river. my board is all garbage with a queen. lots of low cards that could give me a small straight, and of course i could have made a flush on the river. (so some would believe).
the reason im not happy is not because one opponent paired his door card(on 5th), a K. he obviously doesnt have quads. in fact, he doesnt even have a full house, as he folds to my raise.
no, the reason im not happy is because my other (now lone) opponent reraises without a second thought. he paired his door card, an 8 , on 4th.
hes obviously got 8s full, or (as no 8 was out, full 8 handed table) the dreaded quad 8s. he has no Ace showing, and an ace was out, so i dont think he had pocket Aces and filled up on the river. btw, the K pairing his door didnt slow him down at all.
i say ill reraise once and he rereaises. (five bets)
i ask him if he has quad 8s and he tells me he has 8s full and to throw away my flush or straight.
i reraise , he reraises again and i just call. (seven bets each.)
i had chips for about 5 or 6 bets left, should i have kept raising and gone all in? ( i doubt this guy would have stopped reraising.)
p.s. he had a lot of chips.
At a certain point, you have to stop raising if you don't have the nuts, but is this the point. Your hand is pretty damn close to the nuts, but you've already got eighty four dollars in with what is probably the best hand but could be beaten in the situation you describe.
So, it comes down to your impression of your opponent, and his impression of you. Does he think you are a moron? Is he a moron? Is he solid, or weak tight, or a player? These factors are veryt important, but I think that his view of you, if you have an idea, is even more important.
right. i just sat down and he was a total unknown. thats why i prodded him for info on the end by asking him a question. what do you think of that? was it dumb of me? i was kind of relying on the fact that if he did have 8888 i might be able to sense a momentary something in his reaction to my accurately guessing his hand.
brad
I think asking if he had quad 8's was a dumb thing to do. What do you think he's going to say? "Yes, I do. Wanna see?" "No. But I'll keep raising anyway."
Last time I was at the casino, some guy told me about the time he lost $600 in a single hand of 5-10 7cs when his four 3's got beat by a straight flush. I commisserated with him about how awful he must have felt, but I was really thinking, "What an idiot." Sometimes people get four of a kind without a pair showing. And most quads beat quad 3's. Most quads beat quad sixes, too.
according to ray zee, i reraised one time too many. do you think that is acceptable given that the player may be a total newbie?
brad
with open eights when you raise he must think about only calling with eights full. after he raises back he must have atleast eights full hoping you only have a staright. for you to raise you must have better than eights full so when he raises again only a crying call is in order. this is the most raising that should happen. if he is a bad player and you truly believe that he is telling the truth you could raise more but in real life you usually lose this pot when that much raising happens.
thanks a lot. so i did raise one time too many. but only 1 time too many. i think that is acceptable in low limit 6 12 stud where the unknown player ( i recognize at least 80 - 90% of players when i sit down ) may be a novice player.
brad
s
thanks a lot. so i did raise one time too many. but only 1 time too many. i think that is acceptable in low limit 6 12 stud where the unknown player ( i recognize at least 80 - 90% of players when i sit down ) may be a novice player.
brad
Here's a concept to help rationalize how to handle this situation in the future. You're probably going to play millions of poker hands in your life. We all hope to be dealt great hands, but the reality is that there is no such thing as a great HAND, only a great SITUATION. In a lot of cases, a pair might be a great situation; in others, like here, quads are an inferior situation. In a limit game, unless you have the nuts (which is much rarer in stud), every hand is only worth a partial investment of your stack, proportional to the limit you are playing.
I know this situation doesn't come up all that often, but I'm wondering if I did the right thing. The two seat opens with low card, an ace raises. I have aces in the hole. I reraise to try to get it heads up with what is most likely a pocket pair. Everyone mucks including the ace. I'm wondering if I should have just flat called. There were no high cards showing so I was reasonbly sure that everyone was going to fold to his raise anyways. When the guy mucked, he said "you must have aces". Since it was my last hand of the day, I turned them face up. Was the reraise giving away my hand? Should the pocket pair have thrown away his hand? It's possible he was stealing, but it seemed like I was the only one doing any stealing in this game. Very little third street raising.
Anyways, any responses would be appreciated. Sorry for the length.
I have mixed feelings about revealing your hand as you might be up against one or more of these players in the future and, generally speaking, one's opponents should pay if they want to see what was motivating your bet. On the other hand, if you were stealing a lot of pots, this display might work as an advertising ploy (for the future): "when I raise, I'm got the ammo." Since this was your last action of the session, it would tend to leave a strong impression.
Since another ace was out, your aces were that much less likely to morph into anything stronger than aces up; this fact should soften the disappointment that no one called your raise.
No question here. Win the pot immediately. If you get no callers, that's fine. If you get a significant number of callers by not raising, then what if one of them hits the 4th suited or straight card. Now you have a possible problem. I wish I could raise with an ace showing and get everyone to fole, all the time. Unless you are in a very low limit with a low ante or no nate, it is always right to steal the antes with a Aces (IMO). I feel the time to play the aces slowly is (1) when you are pretty sure you can get heads-up with a lower pair or (2) to alter your style as not to be categorized.
I see two problems here. If you can be read that easily, you're not reraising enough on third street. Also, you should find it unsettling that people can read you so easily for a big pair in the hole when you raise with low cards up. Start reraising with hands like 7A/7 and big live 3 flushes. You should also be willing to reraise an ace with a live pair of kings or queens with a live kicker. Note that in your example, had you three bet with kings, you would have been in the lead.
The way this hand should have been played is as follows:
Your reraise on 3rd gets it heads up with the ace. Putting you on a small pair, possibly with an ace kicker, he keeps betting into you, trying to make you lay it down. On fifth or sixth street, assuming neither of you have made a pair on board, you raise him, and he pays you off to the river.
One sure fire way to increase your variance is to get in a game with more than 2 manaics. My advice is to avoid them. Brief case:
I am in seat 8. Strong player in #1, manaic in #2 and #4, a dope in seat #3, a "pondering every hand" Idiot who is drinking beer by the gallons in #6, a potential weak manaic in #7 who becomes a complete manaic when his wife sits next to him--he shows her his hand every time. Needless to say, the loose agressive game proceeds to kill me as the manaics extract vengence on each other as I am in the sandwich with good cards. Of course when it's 3 bets to me with Aces up and the best hand going to the river against 3-4 drawing hands, I get beat more than I win. I am surprised with the winning hands. they are anywhere from a pair of 6's to a full house. Absolutely unreadable. (I think sometimes they cannot even read their own hands). So, I get hammered, and it's a slow hammer. The moral: stay away from games with multiple manaics, especially ones with lots of chips and lots of macho.
ratso,
I enjoy these games now since it is very similar to LL poker where a flush or straight go up in value vs a high pair. You have to be patient but I like playing with maniacs because it's a challenge to decipher their hands. You play less hands but when you do play and win it's worth it. It does increase your variance but it's an exciting game with the maniac's going at it. Personally I prefer this type of game because I don't get bored at all. I used to be scared to play in these games but now I enjoy them. It comes down to attitude for me if I enjoy what I'm doing I play better and hopefully get the cards to match. Zee told me to jump in and mix it up with them if I had the bankroll so I did and I've been jumping in ever since.
Good Luck Ratso
Paul is right because he has the right attitude to play in them. But I'm with you ratso because I never win in them. Once again, it comes down to attitude. I'm a tight player and I simply haven't been able to adjust to these types of games because I don't like big bankroll fluctuations. I look for either tight-aggressive or loose-passive games because I'm very comfortable in them and comfort/confidence in a game is more important than most people realize.
i assume you are talking seven stud here. butanyway play extra live cards as you need to improve with more players in. i like to get in there with them and raise them back and smile. dont be a caller as you then start giving them the pot odds and selfconfidence. play like they do but with good hands. this keeps out the other players as well, as they clam up and you have the two maniacs to yourself. it takes a bigger bankroll but thats how you get a big bankroll. Paul Feeney is a great example of a pilsbury doughboy turned into a monster at the table.
Can anyone provide a definition of a maniac? Are there different categories of maniacs?
Richard
A maniac is someone who raises just to get more chips in the pot seemingly almost every time it is his/her chance to bet, whether he/she has a raising hand or not. Maniacs greatly increase your variance.
You have to adjust your play for them. Maniacs force you to change your playing style to a more defensive style. One maniac can change hands that were favorable draws (in an unraised pot) to unfavorable draws (in a raised pot). I tend to worry excessively about what the maniac behind me will do. Sometimes I am at least tempted to check when I should bet, either because I don't want the maniac to raise (and perhaps drive weak callers out of the pot), or because I want to semi-bluff myself (but semi-bluffing doesn't work well when there is a good chance you will be raised).
With two maniacs, the game becomes a total craps-shoot with every betting round being capped.
You'd think you could take advantage of their seemingly foolish play, but, at least in the short run, that is easier said than done. At the very least you end up playing for higher stakes and with a greater variance than you had originally intended.
The defense against a frequent semi-bluffer is to re-raise often enough to make the semi-bluffer wary of you. In theory, the defense against a maniac is to wait for a good hand and then raise or re-raise - "bet it up." But opponents who are maniacs are not always purely stupid.
I'm with Ratso on this one. Good advice in his first post here. Avoid them.
Buzz
The game was/is 7CS. I will try your suggestions. I kinda knew the right thing to do, I just did not do it. I like the check-raise then smile when I catch the good draw or hand. Let's see how the weekend goes
I will be playing in a multi-game poker tournament in a couple of months, of which one of the games is Canadian Stud, which I have never played or even heard of before, though I understand it is a variant of 5CS. Can someone help me with some strategy? Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Richard
Does anybody know if there are casino's (specifically poker games) in the Cleveland Ohio area?
Seemingly typical $8-$16 game online, I had just sat down one hand before (which I semi-stole with AKQ). I am to the left of the bring in (a deuce) with (8T)9 all diamonds. I call, as there are numerous big cards to act and I would be unlikely to steal, and in that case I'd rather play against a large field.
As it turns out, only one player calls with an 8.
On 4th street, the 8 catches an ace, the deuce catches a 3, and I catch a suited 4. It checks to me and I bet out, planning on taking the free card next round. A8 calls, 23 folds.
On fifth street the A8 catches a 9, with none of his cards suited, and I catch a suited Q. He checks.
Is it terrible, great, or mediocre to check behind him to induce action?
David
I would check behind him but I'll give arguments both ways. Checking is good because the only two hands you have to worry about are a higher flush or a full house. Neither of those hands look probable for your opponent. Check behind him and try to get the two big bets on sixth and seventh. My guess is that he has either a pair of eights, a pair of Aces, or two pair. Definetly bet on sixth street if he checks.
The case for betting would be that first of all, you bet on fourth street representing that you didn't have a four flush. Also most players realize how difficult it is to get a flush in five cards so they would be less apt to believe you. This player may also suspect a slow play would be in order and then would fold to your bet on sixth.
Overall, though, I think a check will most likely get you more value on later streets against the average opponent.
Hope this helps.
How does a bet on 4th street not represent a 4-flush. I'd tend to think that in the mind of most players that'd be exactly what is being represented here.
How does a bet on 4th street not represent a 4-flush? I'd tend to think that in the mind of most players that'd be exactly what is being represented here.
x
It was checked to him. He was the last person to act. It would have been very easy for him to check behind since what he was currently holding (nothing but possibilities) probably would not be worth a bet. He could easily take a free card here.
If it's checked to me on 4th street and I'm last to act with a 4 flush, I'll bet it every single time, if for nothing else but value of the hand. Even if he has aces in this situation your hand is not only a favorite, but a much easier hand to play.
I believe you are an underdog to aces with a four flush. I'm pretty sure that there's a passage about this very situation in Super/System, the 7cs section by Chip Reese. Most of the time I'll take the free card, but if I do bet, it's for deception.
a four flush is a slight favorite over a pair (heads up). i think this assumes your cards are pretty live . its in 7CSFAP somewhere.
brad
A four flush heads up vs a pair of aces is a favorite if the A's do not hold one of the flush cards, and the flush is otherwise live. If the A holds one flush cards it is 50-50 and if two the A's are a favorite.
A flush made early should be played fast for a couple reasons
(1) get the money as soon as you can. If they fold, good. Get the money. I have seen flushes let people stay till they get 2 pair and then fill only to crack your flush.
(2) if they want to draw out, you are the favorite then make them pay
(3) if they do not believe you and call you down and you show a flush, you will be able to bluff on a 4 flush later at least once. This is a case when you bet a pair and get a suited card. You continue to bet your pair for value and get another suited card, you will now be remembered for your flush so go ahead and push the bet just like you did when you had the flush and hope they remember the sting.
That MIGHT be true in a 5-10 game with .50 cent ante and dollar bring in, or in a 10-20 game with a dollar ante and three dollar bring in, but in high ante games like 8-16 with a dollar ante and two dollar bring in, your eight dollar bet into a $14 pot does a lot more for you than say, a five dollar bet into a $5 pot, as in 5-10, or a ten dollar bet into an eleven dollar pot, if your semi-bluff wins you the pot every now and then--which it should because your opponent who caught an ace checked to you and is begging you to put him out of his misery. But even if your bet doesn't end it right there (and any opponent without a pair [or even a pair smaller than nines] or a flush draw would be making a mistake in calling your three straight/four flush ) you still are doing ok and can call a bet on fifth (46-16 or nearly three to one odds with odds [assuming no diamonds fell, and you didn't catch a straight draw or improve in any way] of up to (depending on the cards shown on third) 39-9 (3.33 to one), where if you catch on sixth (3.33 to one against) you can bet (or raise) sixteen and quite possibly punish your opponent for $32 bucks more (at least--you might be able to raise somewhere here).
In 5-10 your bet is a slight loser if you KNEW that one of your opponents would call you on four, but not call you if you made a third suited card, and in 10-20, the situation is not much better. But seldom do you know that, and often an opponent with high cards only will be making a mistake in calling a live four flush with relatively live pair cards.
In this instance, however, the pot is big, your opponents have represented crap, and you are (assuming all flush cards are live) a very small dog against a real hand. You would be making a mistake to give the Ace Eight a free card--what if they started with Eight, Jack queen suited, and now have three overcards to your pretty looking flush draw.
Even in the small ante games, I think it's close, because both of your opponents have represented WEAKNESS (please bet so I can look at the next hand) and you have a hand worth a call (and probably even a raise if your cards are totally live and you had a reasonable chance of being able to take a free one on 5) if someone bet, but in a game with a serious ante, you have a no-brainer.
Getting back to the original question of the poster, I think you must bet it here in a live game, where people might be able to see and remember your face, so that in the future they might throw their hands away when you started with 876 offsuit or a pair of eights and now have a three flush that must hit perfect perfect. On the internet, it might be different, because you may never see the lame internet handles of any of these faceless players again, and therefore you might be able to suck a big bet or two out of the unlikely sap who paired his nine. But still, it seems kind of lame...the only time I might check when I have caught three straight suited cards and it is checked to me after I represented (despite what Mike says) a four flush on fourth, was when I actually have a flush--particularly in a game with a real ante like 8-16.
Unless he is cheating you, is a hacker, can see all of your cards, and would even fold trip eights knowing that one of the eights and his nine are gone.
I have a question. If betting the four flush represents a four flush, what does checking represent?
checking a two flush on board on fourth street represents weak-tightness in a higher ante game, and if a good player does it, I might think he is representing a busted hand of some sort, or one whose cards have just fallen dead on four.
I would check and hope he bets into you on sixth street. He's such a long shot to draw out on you that it's worth letting him have one free card to possibly entice him into a $16 bet that you can raise.
I think it is a weak play to check here...if he puts you on a flush he will still fold to a bet on sixth unless he makes trips or Aces up..whereas if he does not put you on the flush he would have called you on 5th and you lose a bet
Deadbart,
Win the hand now. Bet whether you have the flush or not.
paul
Deadbart,
Another obvious reason to play to win is the only hand you can improve to is a straight flush sometimes or higher flush if you don't have the Ace. The other player has many ways to beat you if he catches two perfect cards especially if he has a pair that is live and all his other cards are live. Granted the odds are in your favor but if he makes trips on 6th street and you check on 5th where you would make him decide whether to play on or not I feel it's a big mistake IMO.
Paul
Are hands like JJ24 unsuited playable in a loose/passive Omaha8 game? I routinely muck these type of hands and normally walk away a winner from most of my playing sessions because of tight starting requirements. However, many times I don't earn my goal of one big bet an hour. I'm afraid that I'm too tight with my starting requirements which come from Shane Smith's book. I'm converting over from Texas Holdem where I was many times guilty of being too tight. Also, are there situations where its proper to play 3-legged high hands? Thanks.
Playing tight is about the most important thing in Omaha. Dont judge your results on individual playing sessions, only the long run matters. Ray Zee's book is what you should read instead of Smith's book.
"Are hands like JJ24 unsuited playable in a loose/passive Omaha8 game?"
No.
"I routinely muck these type of hands and normally walk away a winner from most of my playing sessions because of tight starting requirements. However, many times I don't earn my goal of one big bet an hour."
Consider the variance in the game. The important thing is that your *average* win rate is 1 BB/hr. Individual sessions will be much higher or much lower.
"I'm afraid that I'm too tight with my starting requirements which come from Shane Smith's book."
Ignore anything the Smith book says and order HLSFAP immediately.
"I'm converting over from Texas Holdem where I was many times guilty of being too tight."
Preflop, you probably weren't being too tight in holdem. Many players are too tight *postflop*, but few are too tight preflop. Players who loosen up preflop may still be winning players in holdem, but the loosening up usually costs them money.
"Also, are there situations where its proper to play 3-legged high hands? Thanks."
Almost never. Give specific examples if you want clarification.
Well I think Zee says to play things like JJ 2 4 if you can get in cheap in late positioin. (I t may even be this exact hand).
I haven't read Smith's Book but I have read Zee's book and I didn't find it as helpful as say the Holdem or Stud (High) books. I think a few think its an OK book but not great.
I would regard people who say to ignore what people so and so says (and their advice) w/suspicion. They should point out why the book is bad, and it is to be ignored.
As for a three legged hand , what is that? A hand w/3 cards working well together? I think it would depend. Something like A K 2 x sure, A 3 Q etc sure. 89T 2 no way...
Yesterday's night I entered www.netprofitcasino.com and opened a 250 $ account for playing Blackjack. Unbelievable!... during the third game I WON 5768 dollar !!! Today I received it on my bank account! Wish you guys good luck too!
Nothing to see here.
Nothing to see here, either. Don't you have anythng better to do with your time?
Concept #5: What could be used to help decide whether to continue with the hand or not (besides the two flush not being there)? And what exactly are you hoping for if you continue? An A? A tight (boat for you Americans)? Or would the two pair suffice (I find this highly unlikely)?
Of course you want an ace for the wheel. Next best would be a full house. Next would be a 6 for a straight and number 3 low.
Concept #6: How far shoud one carry an A3 low draw postflop? What is meant by a very soft game?
Obviously a nut draw would be worth a call, i.e. a flop of 2 7 T. Likewise a flop like 6 7 8 where the bettor is most likely going high (blind hands). Any drawing flop where an extremely tight low player calls, is probably not worth the call. 95% probability that they have Ace duece.
Concept #8: What is the general motif that Zee is trying to show us with these hands? I don't think I understand this concept very well
In my opinion these hands depend on toughness of the game and how important your image is. Image is very important in Omaha/8 games if your competition is aware. I've been in games where you can automatically put a raiser on Ace duece suited. In some games you need to play these Concept 8 hands in order to throw off opponents.
Concept #13: What about a set of A's with a possible low on board? What is the point of this concept? Am I not supposed to play a high hand (or a draw to a high hand) if a low is possible? What if the game is loose? (I don't think I understand the point of this concept).
I think what Zee means is that a made low hand also has a chance of making a straight and thereby hogging (scooping) your Aces, two pair, trips, etc..
Other Poker Games
June 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo