Mason's take on Stud vs Holdem

[SA125]

Here is a copy of Mason's response to my post about Jeffage's stud article.

[ QUOTE ]
Hi SA125:

On a slightly different subject, it's my opinion that the very best stud players are better than the best hold 'em players because more skill is available to them because of the nature of stud. This article is a good example.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]


I made reference to this in a stud post. I paraphrased him as saying the best stud players had more of an edge than in holdem. I'm not sure if that's what he meant, but I'd like to re-visit it here because I think an article examining it further would be well received.

I've found that the traditional confrontations in stud are a lot closer in value than in holdem. I mean specifically the edge the leader has on the second and third betting rounds. I believe it's in fact easier for the better player to play more correctly in stud than it is in holdem.

Mason pointed out in one of his books how much larger a bankroll you'd need for stud than what you'd think. That's because you're rarely crushed in stud and have much more info to help you recognize it when you are. And you'll be correctly drawn out on way more also.

I don't want to go any further on this as the post will become as essay, if it hasn't already. So my main point is this. I'd like to see an article in the mag, a new one from Mason or from someone else, who can further explain why stud players are better.

The arguement may focus on the dead card aspect. That of course has merit. Here's a sample hand from stud to get an idea. Starting hand -
Ks Kc Jd - 70-29 fav.
As Kh Jc

If niether of them improve on 4th or 5th it's still less than 3-1. However, if the K's don't improve but the A catches a T, J, Q or K it's a coin flip. If the A's pair it's obviously the fav.

You'd think by looking at those two hands on 3rd the K's would become more of favorite with bricks by 5th. No wonder stud takes such a bigger BR. And the better player should rarely be that far behind.

[Jeff76]

Sklansky touches on this in "Sklansky on Poker". He makes a couple of points, the first of which is to determine what exactly we mean by "more skillful".

I won't go through all of his logic, but in the end he reasons that NL HE is the game that requires the most skill based on the criteria he believes is most important. And this was written before NL HE took off the way it has now.

I'll let his work speak for itself, but I figured I'd pass this along if you were interested in this topic.

My experience is that Stud has more opportunities for knowledgable players to crush average players than HE. I believe that has to do with the amount of information available that a solid player can use and most players ignore. However, it might also be that I just am terrible at HE.

[6471849653]

Limit. Stud (7-card) is a card game. Holdem is a people game. It takes much more skill and experience to be a top holdem player than what it takes to be a top stud player. If one is behind at holdem it's horrible, while if one is behind at stud, it mostly makes less difference. What matters at stud is checking, betting and raising "tricks," and that's about all there is to it: how to get the hand down cheaply, how to get extra (pieces of) bets, that are there at holdem too but only as one aspect, it being more important to know when to fold and when not to fold, not just how to play the hand. Becoming a top stud player needs just one good book while there's no book that's enough for holdem as it's also a people game. The rake is much higher at marginal games like stud when compared to holdem.

[SA125]

Tx for finding the post and the reply. I re-read my post and see why it got so little responses. A long mess with ideas everywhere.

I've played a good amount of live and online limit holdem, stud and no limit holdem. I don't think it's close when I say it takes more skill to be a better holdem player.

My main reasons are -

1 - the flop can change the strength of hands dramatically without giving a lot of evidence of it. So skill means much more after the flop than it does on 4th, 5th and 6th st.

2 - as we both pointed out, the worse hand is rarely so far behind in stud.

3 - in holdem, the flop isn't likely to change your hand. You're 3-1 to flop a pair with two different cards and 7.5-1 to flop a set with a pair. So again, compared to 4th, 5th and 6th in stud, post flop is a dramatic difference in skill.

4 - If you have to improve on the flop to be a winner in holdem, you'll never be a winner.