$5/10 Razz--Three Pair

[LandonM]

[ QUOTE ]
Are your implied odds/idiot player factor/whatever you want to call it worth more than half an SB? I don't know. Someone figure that out for me please lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's almost entirely an implied odds issue. The pure math breaks right about even, but in later stages of the pot, the potential for a higher payoff exists with 2 donators rather than 1- without even considering that at some point, you will likely shed at least one of the players who will orphan his previous bets should he brick badly.

One of the most important factors is that the call instead of the raise masks your a/2/3, allowing you the potential to raise ANY lowball even if it pairs. Bet/Raise/RR pretty much tells your opponent that there is an a/2, a/3, or 2/3 in there somewhere.

The call accomplishes two goals. It serves to potentially bring in another donator while you're starting with the stone cold nuts, and it doesn't betray the fact that you're starting with said nuts. Calling 3rd with A/2/3 is deceptive and is my preferred play almost every time, barring knowledge of my opponents which might dictate a better strategy.

[SCSTWG]

3rd Street - raise
4th Street - fold

[trickyAAA]

with A23, I sometimes raise and somtimes just call on third. I don't think it is correct to play it the same way every time. It may not be correct, but I am not a big fan of re-raising early in razz, because I don't like committing a lot of $ to the pot early when the villian can be way ahead on fourth if I brick and he catches good.

I love this kind of bluff. Very nicely done.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
with A23, I sometimes raise and somtimes just call on third. I don't think it is correct to play it the same way every time. It may not be correct, but I am not a big fan of re-raising early in razz, because I don't like committing a lot of $ to the pot early when the villian can be way ahead on fourth if I brick and he catches good.

I love this kind of bluff. Very nicely done.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is precisely why you raise (its not a re-raise because the first "raise" was the villain completing), you want to commit too many chips early in the pot so if the villain catches good on 4th you have the odds to call down. Remember the villain is likely on a steal, peeling 4th after you just call on 3rd even with A23 as the 3rd street starting hand is too loose. Think of this as pot size manipulation you WANT to play a big pot.

Not re-raising is like calling with AA in the small blind vs a button raiser in Hold'em - the percentage long term play is to re-raise, not call, yet the local nits always seem to call not realizing its not the best option in the long run.

Lastly consider meta game factors. What happens if the villain re-raises again? Wouldn't that be nice? multiple 3rd street raises tie the villain to the pot just like it ties the hero to the pot, we like that as well when we are such a HUGE favorite to win.What about on future hands - the villain will become hesitant to steal lightly when he feels you will defend vigorously.

Now everyone - repeat after me: "not re-raising third street is weak tight, and will make *TT* want to sit on your left forever and ever." - I like [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[trickyAAA]

TT - thanks for the great explanation. I will make this adjustment in my play. Any idea where to find a copy of Sklansky on Razz? It seems to be out of print.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
TT - thanks for the great explanation. I will make this adjustment in my play. Any idea where to find a copy of Sklansky on Razz? It seems to be out of print.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its included in Sklansky on Poker as a double book, and is available at the Gamblers Book Store in Las Vegas (mailorder). Andy might want to add this to the FAQ since its asked so often lately.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[trickyAAA]

Thanks for the info TT. Ordering it right now.

[Andy B]

I used to have a moderately thorough discussion of various books in the FAQ. Mason didn't want any book recommendations in any FAQ, because he doesn't want the forum to appear biased. It's part of the reason that the book forum doesn't have an FAQ.