[Jeffage]

[ QUOTE ]
My understanding from reading Mason's essays was that it's not so much the difference in structure between stud and hold'em that causes variance, but rather the size of the antes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sort of true - as the antes go up proportionally, the variance increases. For example, 5-10 and 10-20 stud are tightly structured (witth a 50 cent and $1 ante respectively). 20-40 stud has a $3 ante, this jump makes chasing slightly more correct and punishes rock tight play on third - as in, you have to steal the antes more. 75 stud has a $15 ante, $25 bring-in. So yes, that's what Mason refers to as a roller coaster ride in his writings on it and it's true, esp. if you're playing against aggressive players who understand the impact of the structure (or just really loose aggro morons). I don't play against such individuals, so I don't have to go apeshit on third because they don't do that. I still do steal quite a bit though, but I can pick my spots. Also, my opponents are not that aggressive on later streets - if they were, the game would play differently.

[ QUOTE ]
In essence high limit stud becomes more of a showdown contest, which gives no one an advantage.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is WAY off. People generally play incorrectly for the structure (too tight, too loose, too passive, etc) so that is an edge. Also, the reason for the higher ante is to handicap truly expert stud players when they play idiots. The higher ante prevents them from losing their money AS QUICKLY. They still must go broke, but they get good gamble for their money and their faults A) playing dead cards, not raising to knock people out, not checkraising, etc, aren't punished as much in the short run. So it makes it a good gamble for them -- but they can and do go lose tons of money in the long run. Come down to the Taj Mahal and see for yourself.

I'd talk more but I have some work to do now.

Jeff