Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
who said not to re-raise with a 3 card 8 against someone in steal position. I assume betgo's comment is in regards to getting aggressive with a 2 card wheel draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

My comment is that sometimes people overdo trying to play aggressive in razz. It doesn't work as well as in holdem and some other games. Trying to represent a big hand is not that useful.

There are situations in tournaments where ante stealing is important in tournaments. Also, I agree that it is standard to reraise with a 3-card 8 against a raiser in steal position.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Please never fold a three card 8 vs. a steal position complete. I guess we could imagine an extremely obscure situation where we have maximum dead cards and a rock tight opponent who doesn't steal but c'mon. Sure sometimes just call if it's a bad 8, many your outs are dead, or for deception but a fold is heinous. I'm assuming what we mean by steal here is a low card facing only one other low card.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Here's why:

Razz Simulation
600,000 trials (Randomized)
dead cards: 3455aa
Hand Pot equity Wins Ties
876 61.01% 365,829 469
**2 38.99% 233,702 469

An 876 here has 61% vs. a random 2 even with 3,4,55,aa dead. Now most players aren't going to have a completely random range, but I think it depends a lot on the stakes you are playing. My experience at 5/10-15/30 ballpark is that good regulars are completing probably 100% of the time if they are facing only 1 other low card. These players will raise a very high % of hands even when facing 2 low cards. Weaker players aren't quite as aggressive in these situations but I don't think I ever give an opponent enough credit to tighten their steal range enough to make playing this hand -EV.

In tournaments I think you have to move steal ranges even closer to 100% random. Stealing antes is much more important and even most the weakest players will understand that.

The only other factor that I could think of coming into play here that could possibly slightly negate advantages in equity is that your opponent has sort of a home field advantage - his 2 vs. your 8 gives him some extra betting power that might make it harder for you to play your hand on later streets. Still, I'm (almost) never folding.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please never fold a three card 8 vs. a steal position complete. I guess we could imagine an extremely obscure situation where we have maximum dead cards and a rock tight opponent who doesn't steal but c'mon. Sure sometimes just call if it's a bad 8, many your outs are dead, or for deception but a fold is heinous.

[/ QUOTE ]To you, it's heinous. To me, it's just a matter of investment strategy. I'm not playing 678 in the situation you describe here. Or in a lot more trny situations. I'm not saying everyone else shouldn't play it, just saying my choice is reasonable.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Are you claiming that it's -EV or that your "investment strategy" includes passing up on +EV situations? I can understand specific tourny circumstances where you'll stay away from this but in a cash game folding is objectively wrong. I don't think personal preference should even be in the discussion here - I could have a personal preference against playing the wheel...

Folding isn't a huge mistake but it is a mistake nonetheless. To me, it is very unreasonable to pass up any +EV situations in a cash game where gamblers ruin isn't an issue.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think personal preference should even be in the discussion here - I could have a personal preference against playing the wheel...

Folding isn't a huge mistake but it is a mistake nonetheless. To me, it is very unreasonable to pass up any +EV situations in a cash game where gamblers ruin isn't an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

The operative clause in your response is: "To me..." Correct. To you. It is not uncommon for players to adopt the mindset that there is always a perfect action and that this action can be determined. It's all part of the wonder of "game theory" re: a guy named Neumann, IIRC.

Some people don't agree. Some use other criteria. Some believe "situational" is at least as important to consider as mathematical. One Razz bracelet holder is known to fold such as A23 on 3rd. In PPLP, Hellmuth remarks that an 8 on 3rd is only good for a steal.

Different players have different ways of playing and still make money. If your firm belief in some system is part of your way of making money it's a great thing. But poker discussions sometimes remind me of religious debates. There is no "one true faith."

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

It's actually game theory that explains why raising a 3 card 8 against a potential steal is probably the best action. (well, realistically, game theory helps explain why you'd raise any hand that you'd want to play against a potential stealer, regardless of the game).

Essentially it's because the initial bettor gets multiple benefits from his bet:
* he may win the pot outright - often the pot odds of are so great that he is nearly required to steal with any low card up. Likewise, his opponents are rarely going to defend with the proper frequency so a bet there shows a nearly automatic profit
* If you call, and he catches (significantly) better than you on 4th, he'll generally win the pot right there - and if he doesn't, you're generally making a mistake by calling

By raising you take away advantage #2 because now
* you can call more liberally on 4th
* he'll have to give up his worst bluffs on 3rd (or call and take the worst of it)
* Now when you catch much better on 4th, he'll fold some of his semi-bluff hands (hands that he should legitimately bet here, that are less than premium hands, like perhaps AT5) or 98A

Because of THIS, if you are in steal position with a real hand, and you get raised by the person you're "stealing" into, you should sometimes, but not always, 3bet, for similar reasons. Obviously, you'll have to do this SOMETIMES with your actual steal hands. Not often. I'd do that more liberally in a cash game than in a tournament.

Am I saying this is the *only* way to do this? No... but I do think it's superior to calling.

Regarding Phil Hellmuth: rumor has it, he doesn't like to play hands as strong as QQ out of position in NLHE. He has an... interesting style.

Regarding what's his face who folds A23, his name escapes me at the moment... That little stat about him gets thrown around a lot. Without context I don't think it's useful information - under WHAT circumstances does he throw away A23. And, would he raise 3rd here? My guess is he'd raise or fold. raise > fold > call

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Prax, by saying that you fold an 876 vs. a steal you are really saying one of the 2 things:

1. Playing this hand is -EV, or
2. Playing this hand is +EV, but you for whatever reason pass up +EV situations as part of your "investment strategy"

Which one is it? Now, maybe I'm alone here (I really doubt it) but an 876 vs. a steal position 2 is only -EV in the most extreme and obscure situations (as I explained earlier). I'd like to hear what others have to say about this.

If we come to the conclusion that it is +EV, then all you have left is #2. Again, I would like to hear other opinions... is anyone passing up +EV situations in cash games? If so... why??

Yes we are all entitled to our opinions but you have to recognize that certain things are objectively true or false in poker. It is true that you should never fold the wheel - if I were to tell you that it was my personal preference to fold the wheel would you let it slide because it is my "personal opinion"? You can certainly fold in this spot and still make money, but in the long run you will be giving up EV which is a MISTAKE no matter how you cut it.

Another interesting question is this - what is the worst hand you will play in this spot? I agree with Rusty that a raise is best here, but I think a call has to be better than a fold. No need to get back into it but please remember that our equity vs. a random 2 is 60% and we are getting somewhere around 2-1 on the call.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
I were to tell you that it was my personal preference to fold the wheel would you let it slide because it is my "personal opinion"?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have time for this very interesting discussion with you and Rusty, right this minute as I am trying to find the trny hands from last night that I played badly so more people can tell me I'm wrong more thoroughly. (It's a good thing.) But .."let it slide?" I'm not your parent, teacher or boss. I would, in context of the discussion, ask you why this was your preference, as it would seem unusual to me.

I do not think you are "right." I also don't think I am.

Rusty - it was Huck Seed and you can read it in context in th FT Trny Guide. Sometimes, in some situations, a player might decide they simply do not want to get involved in some large pot - or might decide they'd rather watch two other stacks decimate one another. In a cash game, the board can be so bad and the betting so aggressive before anyone gets to your A23 that it might seem a reasonable time to go to the head and let them play the huge pot. The cards in your hand, as you know, are only one determining factor in EV. Annie Duke folded AA in a trny for similar reasons. And Hellmuth is simply the best NLHE trny player there is, according to the source I respect most, Doyle Brunson. He is also, rep notwithstanding, exceptionally good at a wide variety of other games. He just stopped playing them. And I'm taking everything said by world-class players very seriously.

Now hang on, I'm going to post some hands you can have fun critiquing my bad play on.....

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Right, Huck Seed. I'm just saying that, just because he'd fold A23 in some spots, that doesn't mean he (or hellmuth) would not raise here every time. Invoking statements that they've made in general about razz in the past does not amount to analyzing a situation.