Triple draw: hold them dead?

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a concept borrowed from Razz, I advise all serious TD players to read Sklansky on Poker because although its a different game the thought process is exactly the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

A quick note...

Some of Sklansky's old-school essays on single-draw lowball have some good discussions on the value of "holding them dead." (Indeed, that's where I learned the phrase.) Agreed that triple draw players would do well to read them.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

Where can I find those? Also Mason's draw book is helpful and perhaps the most authoritative on the subject of draw, although the style of game is no longer played. Get it now because its out of print, 2+2 won't be reissuing it.

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes, I'm not sure I remember. I think some of them are in ~(Getting the Best of It in) Poker, Gaming, and Life~.

A sample idea is that a reaonable strategy in pre-draw situations -- certainly not the only good one, but a plausible one -- is if you open the button and get reraised by the big blind, to reraise with certain hands, just call with slightly better ones to hold them dead, reraise with still better ones for value, just call with slightly better ones to slowplay, and again rereaise with slightly better ones (now the nuts and near-nuts) in case you can win a ton of bets from another very strong hand. The greater point is that a proper strategy can be "discontinuous." Cute, eh?

--Nate

[DeathDonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, I tried to take into account cards being in other people's hands, but I think I miscounted them badly, because he should only have 5 or 6 or so, on average. That right there probably invalidates the calculations I made in the post above and swings it to a bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, this is the biggy, it's so important I almost wish it wasn't posted on 2+2. Another thing is if you check and the SB then draws one, the BB will be correct to break his pat ten or jack anyway, which you did not assume.

Finally, while TT made an excellent summary of the merits of capping and calling on the flop, I prefer a flop cap here because you are last to act, and of course the one card wheel draw. I find that capping in spots like this and then drawing tends to give you a LAG image without giving anything up.

-DeathDonkey

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing is if you check and the SB then draws one, the BB will be correct to break his pat ten or jack anyway, which you did not assume.

[/ QUOTE ]

which he will probably not do because this is triple draw and everyone LOVES to stay pat. T9875? Its the second nutz!

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

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed with the value bet statement. Think of it this way, you are 99.9% positive they are calling you down, get the money in the pot NOW rather than later, because you don't know if there will be a later. Its the same reason why you will often raise and re-raise on the flop, rather than wait for the turn in a multi-way pot... the concepts never change, its just a different game.

As for the flop, there is merit in capping and there is merit in calling. If your opponents are over-aggressive with loose draws then I like the cap allot, except for the type of opponent who will stand pat after someone caps with J high just to see if you will break (this opponent type is rare on UB, but they exist). If they are laggy but generally draw to good hands a cap is not recommended because the good cards you need may already be out there.

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

[/ QUOTE ]

I just noticed an error in my first paragraph, I was using a Hold'em analogy but it reads as if I am talking about TD. I hope that clears it up.

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

[Nate.]

I checked. SB drew 2, BB drew 1, and I stood pat. SB checked, BB bet, I called, and the SB folded. The BB showed A7532.

If I had it to do over again, I'd bet. The BB doesn't have quite enough outs, on average, even with his wheel draws, and the SB's presence in the pot will cause him to break more hands than he otherwise might. Furthermore, a whole lot of assumptions have to be right on for checking to be even a little correct.

Thanks to everyone for the input.

--Nate

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
I checked. SB drew 2, BB drew 1, and I stood pat. SB checked, BB bet, I called, and the SB folded. The BB showed A7532.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you playing A-5 or 2-7?

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

[DeathDonkey]

I assume 2-7 and I think BB made a pretty decent bluff there.

-DeathDonkey

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume 2-7 and I think BB made a pretty decent bluff there.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Deuce indeed.

--Nate