Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

Yeah, I'm not folding 863 there - if you can't call 863 there, you can't call it anywhere, really, except to defend against steals. That seems way too tight.

And for your AK example, I'll call even if I *know* he has QQ obviously.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I disagree. I didn't have time to add up the money, but I'm winning defending the bring-in about 3.5 times out of ten.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where are you getting this statistic from? Also, you would really need to filter out times that
* your upcard is not that bad and his is not that good
* he's in steal position - it's generally OK to defend there getting 4:1 with 2 wheel cards down, or even 2 cards to a 6.
* Probably also need to filter out short-handed cases


[/ QUOTE ]
No, I don't need to filter any of that out. What I said was I am winning defending the bring-in about 3.5 times in ten. I made no caveats. The poster I was responding to made a blanket statement about defending - not in the OP's specific position, but just doing it. It sounded like he copied the whole thing right out of a book and the premise is simply undemonstrable.

Look - I didn't say I defended every time - I say, and maintain, and am not "wrong" about, the fact that intelligent defense is positive EV. For me. I get real tired of responses that seem to imply I make this stuff up. I don't.

How do you decide to defend? I have a set of rules for myself that work. If you don't want to defend, don't.

This isn't an issue about being "right or wrong." This is an issue of playing style and what you make work for you. I am not right. I am simply doing something my way that works for me. Seemed to work ok for Chips, too.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Will you ever accept that you are wrong in this issue Prax? :P Do you have PT? How much have you won playing paint cards up?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have PT. I also have no idea how to get that exact info. I don't know, really. But I might do one of my weird things like go thru a bunch of this by hand and look at the money and see how positive (or neg) it is.

If I'm correct, I am reserving the right to be COMPLETELY obnoxious about it. If I'm wrong I grant you and everyone else the right to flame me unmercifuly. UH - but only for like - 48 hours.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]

No, I don't need to filter any of that out. What I said was I am winning defending the bring-in about 3.5 times in ten. I made no caveats. The poster I was responding to made a blanket statement about defending - not in the OP's specific position, but just doing it. It sounded like he copied the whole thing right out of a book and the premise is simply undemonstrable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who are you referring to? The only posts about not defending here have to do with the fact that the villain raised from early position into a field of low cards, and how this is different than defending from someone in steal position. I've glanced through the thread and I didn't see anything leap out that said "fold this no matter what"

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

I would (almost) never fold this to an obvious steal. I would (almost) always fold this to the guy acting right after the bring in. Varying would take a very player specific read or an unusual up card scenario.

Third street here isnt a very complex a razz situation.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The call on 3rd is horrible. There is a huge difference between calling someone is steal position who you know has random hole cards and calling someone who raised into a bunch of low cards and you know has at worst a smooth 8.

I wouldn't even call this raise with 368. The discount you are getting does not justify the call.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you POSSIBLY not call w/ 368 there? You outflop him you win the pot... Also, the worst you can be is 42% on 3rd. Do you fold AK in the BB to a single raise vs. an unknown because he might have QQ?

-ChipsAhoya

[/ QUOTE ]


Not true, you could be 34% with 368, since your cards are dead.

I don't think 368 is at all the equivalent of AK. It would be like folding A9o to an early position raise.

I am not going to always call when I know I am behind, just because I am not that much behind. You often wind up losing a big pot that way.


http://twodimes.net/h/?z=3784266
pokenum -mc 500000 -r 2c 4s 5h - 3h 6h 8h / ts 4c qd 7h 5d 2d
Razz (7-card Stud A-5 Low): 500000 sampled outcomes
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
4s 2c 5h 330188 66.04 169734 33.95 78 0.02 0.660
8h 6h 3h 169734 33.95 330188 66.04 78 0.02 0.340

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The call on 3rd is horrible. There is a huge difference between calling someone is steal position who you know has random hole cards and calling someone who raised into a bunch of low cards and you know has at worst a smooth 8.

I wouldn't even call this raise with 368. The discount you are getting does not justify the call.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you POSSIBLY not call w/ 368 there? You outflop him you win the pot... Also, the worst you can be is 42% on 3rd. Do you fold AK in the BB to a single raise vs. an unknown because he might have QQ?

-ChipsAhoya

[/ QUOTE ]


Not true, you could be 34% with 368, since your cards are dead.

I don't think 368 is at all the equivalent of AK. It would be like folding A9o to an early position raise.

I am not going to always call when I know I am behind, just because I am not that much behind. You often wind up losing a big pot that way.


http://twodimes.net/h/?z=3784266
pokenum -mc 500000 -r 2c 4s 5h - 3h 6h 8h / ts 4c qd 7h 5d 2d
Razz (7-card Stud A-5 Low): 500000 sampled outcomes
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
4s 2c 5h 330188 66.04 169734 33.95 78 0.02 0.660
8h 6h 3h 169734 33.95 330188 66.04 78 0.02 0.340

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I didn't account for dead cards, but still, if he bricks and you don't, you win the pot here. I can't imagine your statement meant you would call w/ 862 but not 863 because of dead cards.

368 is not A9o because A9o could be 20-25% vs. a huge range, domination, etc. W/ 863 it's exceedingly likely you're not worse than 40%.

-ChipsAhoya

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

If you start with a wheel draw and brick on 4th, you should often play if you have any reasonable suspicion someone started light.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]

I have PT. I also have no idea how to get that exact info. I don't know, really. But I might do one of my weird things like go thru a bunch of this by hand and look at the money and see how positive (or neg) it is.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you're so inclined to do so, here's how:

Go to your General Info tab
Halfway down select the Categories tab
Maintain Categories...
Click Add and give it a name like "Paint in the Door"
Check off all the cards for your hole cards and only JQK for your door card.
Click Build Hand Patterns to make sure you're getting the right examples.
Click save, then close.

Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The call on 3rd is horrible. There is a huge difference between calling someone is steal position who you know has random hole cards and calling someone who raised into a bunch of low cards and you know has at worst a smooth 8.

I wouldn't even call this raise with 368. The discount you are getting does not justify the call.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you POSSIBLY not call w/ 368 there? You outflop him you win the pot... Also, the worst you can be is 42% on 3rd. Do you fold AK in the BB to a single raise vs. an unknown because he might have QQ?

-ChipsAhoya

[/ QUOTE ]


Not true, you could be 34% with 368, since your cards are dead.

I don't think 368 is at all the equivalent of AK. It would be like folding A9o to an early position raise.

I am not going to always call when I know I am behind, just because I am not that much behind. You often wind up losing a big pot that way.


http://twodimes.net/h/?z=3784266
pokenum -mc 500000 -r 2c 4s 5h - 3h 6h 8h / ts 4c qd 7h 5d 2d
Razz (7-card Stud A-5 Low): 500000 sampled outcomes
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
4s 2c 5h 330188 66.04 169734 33.95 78 0.02 0.660
8h 6h 3h 169734 33.95 330188 66.04 78 0.02 0.340

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I didn't account for dead cards, but still, if he bricks and you don't, you win the pot here. I can't imagine your statement meant you would call w/ 862 but not 863 because of dead cards.

368 is not A9o because A9o could be 20-25% vs. a huge range, domination, etc. W/ 863 it's exceedingly likely you're not worse than 40%.

-ChipsAhoya

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually would not call an early position raise into a bunch of low cards with an 8 unless my cards were live. I do think this is somewhat similar to having a dominated hand in holdem. Maybe I'm a nit, but I win at mid limits playing this way.