Razz: Defending against steal
 

Hi,
yesterday I was playing a MTT razz tourney and the players on my right were very aggressive at 3rd street, if there were 3 or less low cards left, one of them would almost always complete. I almost never had a chance to steal the antes. I tried to reraise them when I get any 3 card 8, but i was card dead, so they got away with it most of the time, and I think this made them steal even more. And to make the matters worse, the player on my left was extremely tight and passive, he never reraised the stealers.

Do you have any suggestions against stealers? Do you think it is ok to flat call them with any 2 crad wheel? Do you think this will cause them to steal less?

Thanks for reading.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

We must have been playing the same tournament. This is the new look in Razz from the NLHE refugees: Sammy Farha Razz. And they are starting to hit the cashgames. ATsmallC - see if they win. Any four cards under ten, they will not fold. Any four cards under 8, they jam the pot every street if they can.Same with any three wheels - all the way to the river. They don't care if they lose and they are winning a disturbing number of times.

IF you get a good seat with cards that hold up, you can wait them out, because 90% bust out in the first 90 minutes. Later in the trny they settle down a little.

It's power turbo Razz. "Turbo" Razz..an oxymoron.

I'm at a complete loss when there are more then two of them at a table.



Play the $10 or higher.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

I agree with Praxising. I find that in the MTT tourneys I just wait for a good starters and let the maniacs fight it out. In the later stages of the tourney or final table it gets a little rough if you go card dead BUT forcing the issue doesn't seem to help and ends up getting you in trouble. I have found success with a tight strategy.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
We must have been playing the same tournament. This is the new look in Razz from the NLHE refugees: Sammy Farha Razz. And they are starting to hit the cashgames. ATsmallC - see if they win. Any four cards under ten, they will not fold. Any four cards under 8, they jam the pot every street if they can.Same with any three wheels - all the way to the river. They don't care if they lose and they are winning a disturbing number of times.

IF you get a good seat with cards that hold up, you can wait them out, because 90% bust out in the first 90 minutes. Later in the trny they settle down a little.

It's power turbo Razz. "Turbo" Razz..an oxymoron.

I'm at a complete loss when there are more then two of them at a table.



Play the $10 or higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you know the saying "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger"? Well these maniacs operate off the same theory. For example if you were in a STT with 3 maniacs like this and they were jamming every pot and you were waiting for premium hands to get involved with, what would the table look like after a couple of the maniacs flamed out? If you were catching good starting hands you'd probably have won a decent share, but if not then with a starting stack of N chips, we'd see (with the maniacs denoted by "M"):

M #1: busto
M #2: busto
M #3: 3N
PRAX: N
TAG1: N
TAG2: N
TAG3: N
TAG4: N

I think it's pretty apparent how this is not to your advantage, especially once the limits go up and your starting stack keeps getting shorter and shorter, giving you less chance to obsorb the inevitable swings.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

If you can isolate against a maniac, do it, and call down light. By no means should you re-raise him with minor edges post-3rd but if you've got a lock on him go nuts. With a minor edge or deficit, let him bet at you. You can take down big pots against these guys with pretty crap hands.

If the table has it figured out and are not going to fold to isolation raises, or are going to re-raise, etc, then I'll call along with some more speculative hands like great nines, but if I can isolate, I'm going to play a lot more 2-card wheels with 9s and Ts, any 3 card 8, etc.

I'm at a table now where initially there were 3 maniacs, one more maniac than the other two combined. He went broke before level 2 and I got a lot of it. One big hand I had A69. I could not get it heads up, and I knew that, so I just called along with the 2 maniacs capping (one of them showing a K, one of them showing an 8 - I don't think I'd come along if they both showed cards under my door). I played passively until 5th, when it was very likely I had the best hand (a 96) and the best draw (a pretty decent 6). I got bet into on the river, called with a rivered 86, and beat LAG #1 who had had a worse 9 than I had on 5th.

One thing that is very important with maniacs is to avoid inflating the pot early. You never have enough of an edge on 3rd that you want a maniac to call you to the river 100% of the time, so don't make it nearly correct for them to do so. By 5th you often have enough of an edge to start jamming. In multi-way pots you can start jamming 4th a lot of the time because although your edge might be lower than heads up, you are getting twice the action on your bets.

Pick your spots, though. Open your range but not so much that your brain falls out. Maniacs will be in nearly every pot, so it's easier to manipulate them than solid players.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

I should point out that in cash games, as well as tournaments, TAG players often stumble against LAGs by trying to out-aggress them. I think it's often correct to give up a little EV that you could gain by raising a LAG and instead call him. In the long run this keeps him betting at you longer with crap. Many LAGs are not stupid and will shut down if you play back at them with their worst hands, and keep going with their best hands. If you check-call check-call along, they will keep betting with both their good and their bad hands. It's often a good idea to raise the river with any reasonable hand. And don't forget that LAGs get good hands also.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

It depends on the situation, but aggression, particularly aggression on 3rd street is usually NOT very effective in razz. This is a game with too much information. You can't play it like holdem where no ones cards are face up.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

The players I mentioned were not maniacs. They were just stealing way too often.

And not reraising someone who completed in steal position(espeically in cash games) with a 3-card 8 is a big sin in Razz. If you don't do so, it is correct for such player to complete with any 2 card hand.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

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.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
The players I mentioned were not maniacs. They were just stealing way too often.

And not reraising someone who completed in steal position(espeically in cash games) with a 3-card 8 is a big sin in Razz. If you don't do so, it is correct for such player to complete with any 2 card hand.

[/ QUOTE ] Your description of their 3rd st play fits the "maniac" profile. However, I was the one who made that comparison, and as you weren't responding yourself, I believe a lot of the comments were informed by the response to the OP.

I don't think you necessarily always raise someone who completes in "steal position" with a three card 8. There are boards, opponents, situations and certain three card eights I when would call or might just fold.

prax-

Oh, Poker Goddess, be merciful to me, a sinner....

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.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. I didn't invoke to inform this specific situation, it was about generally not having some "must play" about any hand because of theoretical mathematical advantage only. As for ol' Phil, his advice is don't play them unless you are stealing. Doesn't mean he follows his own advice, of course.

As long as we are on this, if you pull out all your starting 8s and all your starting 7s, what's the difference in win rate? Might as well have some hard data here, might show something more useful to us than opposing opinions no matter where they come from.

And if you get the chance to analyze the math in my two trny hands, I'd appreciate it. I know it's a lot of work.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

I'm playing 2 tourneys right now but I'll read your hands later. I am definitely winning with my 8s... I'll get exact #s later.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
Some believe "situational" is at least as important to consider as mathematical

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like you are arguing for me? The situation is exactly what should be influencing your decision to play a bad 8...

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm playing 2 tourneys right now but I'll read your hands later. I am definitely winning with my 8s... I'll get exact #s later.

[/ QUOTE ]I wouldn't be surprised if you are winning with 8s, or if you weren't, I guess. I was interested in the comparison of win/loss between 8s and 7s. You know, like how much difference does it really make?

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds like you are arguing for me? The situation is exactly what should be influencing your decision to play a bad 8...

[/ QUOTE ] I'm not arguing at all. I'm not attempting a proof. However, can you give me a situation where you would play 876 and one where you wouldn't?

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm playing 2 tourneys right now but I'll read your hands later. I am definitely winning with my 8s... I'll get exact #s later.

[/ QUOTE ]I wouldn't be surprised if you are winning with 8s, or if you weren't, I guess. I was interested in the comparison of win/loss between 8s and 7s. You know, like how much difference does it really make?


[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I dragged out my stats.
9s : .25bb/hand
8s: .49bb/hand
7s: .66bb/hand
6s: .75bb/hand
5s: .75bb/hand

This is lifetime stats, including .25/.5 through 1/2. If I limit it to .5/1 and 1/2 I get very similar numbers. 40k hands sample. Note that I am actually a minescule winner over this sample size. It's kind of embarassing actually. A better player would probably have better numbers for all of these.

If you use pokertracker I can describe to you how to get these stats.

Note that I do fold some 8s, depending on relative position, cards out, my up card, etc, etc. Situations where I'd fold an 8 include:
* I'm first to act with something like 875, 8 up - I instamuck here unless there are very few low cards showing, or there are like lots of 8s and 7s up.
* I have a quality 8 like A48 with the 8 up, and I'd have to call 2 bets cold, or I'd have to call 1 bet but there are too many low cards after me, and they're my outs. I'd actually probably fold to 2 bets even if I had the A up unless the rest of the up cards were pretty favorable to me.

According to pokertracker, I play 3 card 8s 92% of the time, I go to showdown with them 33% of the time, and I win at showdown 55% of the time. My showdown rates for better starting cards are a bit higher, but the win rates are not that much better. So I probably play 3 card 8s better post-3rd. That's kind of ironic.

Situationally, when someone raises in steal position and you have an awful 8, you have no information - his hand can range from any 2 down, to the best 2 down, and he'll play 3rd the same way. The ONLY time I'd fold 876 here, is if the player was so bad and predictable that I could be almost positive that he would not steal. And I have not met that player yet.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

If the alleged ante thief is raising through one or two low cards, you should give her credit for a hand ... or at least wait for a good situation to play back. (Note, though, that if you are the bring-in with an 8 or 9, that means that the deck is poor in good ones.)

But if you're in a situation where you have a king in the door, its folded to the player to your right, and she raises, and you have two good ones in the hole lower than her door card, you should consider defending.

With a good card in the door, the presumed thief should be raising with any two in the hole, which means your hand is actually ahead of her range. If you catch good on fourth and fifth, especially if the villain bricks, you are in a good spot. If you brick on fourth, give it up and wait for a better spot.

At Sabyl Cohen and Steve Landrum's wedding last August, I had a long talk about defending bring-ins in stud games with Bill Chen and Jerrod Ankemann. We talked about razz, and I took the position that the bring-in with a brick in the door was a mandatory fold. Bill argued strenuously what I said above: that if you have two good ones in the hole, you are ahead of your attackers possible range of hands and should play.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]

OK, I dragged out my stats.
9s : .25bb/hand
8s: .49bb/hand
7s: .66bb/hand
6s: .75bb/hand
5s: .75bb/hand

This is lifetime stats, including .25/.5 through 1/2. If I limit it to .5/1 and 1/2 I get very similar numbers. 40k hands sample. Note that I am actually a minescule winner over this sample size. It's kind of embarassing actually.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for doing this, I'd like to veer off-topic a second. This looks pretty good to me, but I'm not a math person, as we all know. Still, you are averaging .58 bb per hand. Not including your 4s and 3s which would bring it up, let's call it .6. So, per hour (assuming you play few Ts or higher) you are going to be playing maybe ten hands? So wouldn't this make your win rate 6bb per hour? I thought that was good? Looks good to me, anyway.

So, back to topic, I think after I had a big slump, I got very conservative in terms of limiting variance. I see here we have a 24% difference between the 9 and 8 and a 17% between the 8 and 7. If you are very careful with how you play the 8s, you must be twice as careful in how you play the 9s. I'm wondering, of these hands, how many of the winning 9s and 8s were successful steals?

I think the differences in the win rates flattening out after 7 is pretty interesting.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]

Thanks for doing this, I'd like to veer off-topic a second. This looks pretty good to me, but I'm not a math person, as we all know. Still, you are averaging .58 bb per hand. Not including your 4s and 3s which would bring it up, let's call it .6. So, per hour (assuming you play few Ts or higher) you are going to be playing maybe ten hands? So wouldn't this make your win rate 6bb per hour? I thought that was good? Looks good to me, anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm paying .1bb/hand (10bb/100) in antes, and .03bb/hand (3bb/100) in bringins. But actually I play more like 25 hands per hundred. If I can average .6bb/hand that I play, that should be
+15bb/100 from winning
-13bb/100 from antes/bringins
for a total of 2bb/100
But also, I lose money stealing with worse hands, defending with worse hands. Or if my average is more like .5bb/hand that I play, then it's
+12.5bb/100 from winning
-13bb/100 from antes/bringins
whoops, -.5bb/100 after antes/bringins.

Which goes to show why averaging .5bb/hand and .6bb/hand that you play is a huge difference. And really, this is why missing a correct 1bb on a regular basis, or making incorrect 1bb calls on a regular basis, can easily swing you from a winning to a losing player.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Hmm, actually that's not quite right, because the antes/bringins are already factored into the hands that I won (that is I won .6bb/100 AFTER the antes/bringins). Uh, maybe I'll work this out later.

Hint: I'm barely above breaking even. About +.5bb/100. I feel bad about that, but there are hardly any long-term winners at 1/2 who are doing better (on FTP, I have almost no stats on people at PS), so I don't feel toooo bad. I've been really studying the ones who are maintaining a better win rate than me, and talking to some of them. I'm pretty sure one of them is a 2+2er.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm, actually that's not quite right, because the antes/bringins are already factored into the hands that I won (that is I won .6bb/100 AFTER the antes/bringins). Uh, maybe I'll work this out later.

Hint: I'm barely above breaking even. About +.5bb/100. I feel bad about that, but there are hardly any long-term winners at 1/2 who are doing better (on FTP, I have almost no stats on people at PS), so I don't feel toooo bad. I've been really studying the ones who are maintaining a better win rate than me, and talking to some of them. I'm pretty sure one of them is a 2+2er.

[/ QUOTE ]
You may be neglecting the fact that at the microlevels you're usually playing against a hugely profitable player called "the rake" Making any profit at all I think puts you in the category of "good" player, and it probably takes a top 10% player to beat the game for >2BB/100.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
At Sabyl Cohen and Steve Landrum's wedding last August, I had a long talk about defending bring-ins in stud games with Bill Chen and Jerrod Ankemann. We talked about razz, and I took the position that the bring-in with a brick in the door was a mandatory fold. Bill argued strenuously what I said above: that if you have two good ones in the hole, you are ahead of your attackers possible range of hands and should play.

[/ QUOTE ]
Bill and Jerrod may have seen the threads in this forum that crop up from time to time on this issue, or the 2p2 magazine article written by our own AP super sleuth Adanthar defending the play of defending your bring-in. Next time you see Bill, tell him for me that he's right.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
But if you're in a situation where you have a king in the door, its folded to the player to your right, and she raises, and you have two good ones in the hole lower than her door card, you should consider defending.

[/ QUOTE ]If you are bring-in with (67)8 and it is folded around to the player on your right who raises with a 6 in the door, do you call or raise?

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But if you're in a situation where you have a king in the door, its folded to the player to your right, and she raises, and you have two good ones in the hole lower than her door card, you should consider defending.

[/ QUOTE ]If you are bring-in with (67)8 and it is folded around to the player on your right who raises with a 6 in the door, do you call or raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Raise. Check out example 5 (page 166 in my edition) in Sklansky on Razz. In his example he has 862 which certainly is better than 876, but I think it still applies.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Bill already knows he's right. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

Look ahead to fourth street. Imagine catching a 6 and the villain catches a jack.

If you had reraised, the pot is big enough that the villain knows she can call you if you bet, assuming she started with a real hand. Do you bet in that spot, or check-call?

On the other hand, if you had just called the villain's raise on third, you can push a villain off the pot when she catches bad and you don't obviously do so.

Remember also with an eight in the door the villain knows how good a hand you can make. And if you improve to a seven, it's going to be a rough seven.

And unless the folded upcards are all sixes and sevens, the deck is pretty depleted of cards that help your hand.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

What hands will villain bet with as the last low card into an 8? This is the key thing. It tells you what percentage of the time your opponent does not have a 3 card 8 or better. Because if you catch a 6 and your opponent catches a J, and they did not start with a 3 card hand, the hand is over. In fact, almost any time you catch significantly better than your opponent, the hand is over. And yes, I would bet 4th in that case - you pretty much have to.

And obviously, raising keeps you from having to ditch your hand on 4th, also, when YOU catch a J and THEY catch a 6.

And finally, your opponent will throw away the worst of their bluffs to a range (well, some kinds of opponents will. This is great because you win the pot, and also, when they call you can narrow their range down quite a bit, i.e. they probably have at LEAST 2 low cards)

These situations are quite difficult to play well, and like blind battles in holdem they can make you feel like an idiot, but I think raising is still the right play. Playing good poker often makes you look kind of silly.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, if you had just called the villain's raise on third, you can push a villain off the pot when she catches bad and you don't obviously do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you, I have been arguing this position in a variety of threads for a while (not as well as you said it) and now I will bookmark this and refer everyone to you in future.

I may be a bit extreme as I have been known to fold 678 or even 687 fairly often unless there is some very positive situation for my hand on board. I would flat call that completion and run like a jackrabbit unless 4th was very favorable.

neener-neener you guys!

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

So some of the time you get pushed off your hand, some of the time you push your opponent off their hand. Awesome. Except... you have a hand on 3rd 100% of the time, your opponent has one like 30-40% of the time. It's a huge victory for them to make you fold 4th if you brick.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
So some of the time you get pushed off your hand, some of the time you push your opponent off their hand. Awesome. Except... you have a hand on 3rd 100% of the time, your opponent has one like 30-40% of the time. It's a huge victory for them to make you fold 4th if you brick.

[/ QUOTE ]I have to say this is the best on-going debate I ever had on a message board and I've been posting since before you had a driver's license. Now, why is it a "huge" victory? It's a considerably huger victory if he's completing with K4A and he ends up with 8754A to my 87632 and I end up putting in a bunch of bets and he pips me out of a big pot I didn't want to get involved in in the first place with my worst possible 8.

I'm calling. If I brick and he doesn't I'm out and he didn't have a thing to do with it. It's my choice and card luck.

So he wins some. Good. Makes him feel good, keeps him around for a better spot. And nothing keeps 'em betting more than the perception they have "beaten" you once and can do so again.

Re: Razz: Defending against steal
 

[ QUOTE ]
These situations are quite difficult to play well

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo.