Question concerning an example in SOR

[mshalen]

I was rereading Sklansky on Razz and don't understand the rational for the answer to one of the examples. Any help would be appreciated.

In the example the hands are as follows:
Opponent: XX783
You hold: A2394
Q: What do you do if your opponent bets?
A: Raise because you are either a monster or a small underdog.

I understand if xx are 2 random cards you are a 78/22 favorite. Certainly you are ahead of a bluff. But how often do you see a 7 door card used as a bluff against a 3 when the pot is opened? I would put the odds of this being the situation, and you holding a "monster" as being pretty remote. If you always assume that your opponent has 2 random cards and raise based on this assumption then you will soon be broke.

If your opponent has 2 cards ranked 6 or below, which could be a reasonable holding, then you are a 55/45 dog and you are raising hoping to catch a 5,6 or 7 in the next 2 cards. You also hope that your opponent doesn't catch to improve. I don't understand the reason that you would grow the pot in a situation where you need to catch to possibly get ahead.

In holdem I may raise with a flush or straight draw but this is a semi-bluff and a big part of my potential profit is gained from where I can get my opponent to fold the currently best hand. But in Razz where your board is open to view by all players your 9 upcard defines your hand and your opponent will not fold to a raise, if I was the opponent I would probably reraise.

As a side note: One problem I have with the book is that the examples do not give any information concerning dead cards or previous betting. This information would make the problems much more usefull.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]

Opponent: XX783
You hold: A2394
Q: What do you do if your opponent bets?
A: Raise because you are either a monster or a small underdog.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know why Sklansky would do it. I do this just to say: <font color="blue">"Hey, even with a 9, I have four-to-a-wheel and unless you have a better draw, do you REALLY want to invest more in this hand?" </font> About half the time they fold, because they have junk in the hole, I presume. Sometimes they don't fold and I check/call and then bet the river no matter what I hit and then they fold. This happens about a third of the time. So, I win more then half the pots this way.

But I don't know nuthin' 'bout no math - I just like pushing.

But if I had one card to come instead of two when I hit the fourth wheel, then I just call.

[2461Badugi]

The key is that villain can easily be betting his board here. Even presuming he started with a legitimate hand, he still has a pair here a lot; if he has exactly one pair you make a load of money on your raise, because he's way behind but he still has to call and try to suck out. Whereas if he does have a made 87, you're losing very little (and may actually be ahead depending on the dead card situation).

Against some very aggro players (like me sometimes) it can be better to call down, because they'll put bets in dead bluffing if you let them keep the betting lead.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Even presuming he started with a legitimate hand, he still has a pair here a lot;

[/ QUOTE ]
Is there a statistic on how often you can expect to pair in five cards?

[Johnny#5]

This question doesn't really have a clear answer in a vacuum IMO. In order to offer something really useful you'd need to know the action on previous streets and the other player's observed tendencies. That said, against lost opponents this is a raise b/c you will gain more in pot equity when he has a pair or some pudwhack hand than you will lose when he 3bets and turns his hand over. Also 8's are at least partial outs for you too, not just 5's, 6's and 7's. But, as you know, reads based on action will be the biggest factor.

As for how often he pairs, in a vacuum that's just a simple combinatorics problem and in this case, assuming he started with a 3-card 8 or better, there are 32 cards 8 or lower in the deck. We have A234 so there are 3 8's and 2 3's he could have in the hole (ignore the 7's b/c that's his door card). So 5 cards pair him out of 22 unseen giving him about a 23% chance of being paired. It's 22 b/c we have A234 and we know he has no 7's down and he already has 3 cards up so that's 10 already seen out of 32.

However, the actual probability will vary because we may be able to weight his hole cards toward lower or higher values using hand reading and there will be dead cards to account for. Those are things that you will have to determine and account for yourself at the table.

[Praxising]

Johnny, it was very generous of you to take the time to answer so completely.

I have a grown child and have never balanced a checkbook. Can't. Some sort of bizarre brain damage at birth, I imagine.

In Hold 'Em literature, I read there is a 50% chance the board will pair. (I cannot remember where I read it, it just stuck with me.) So, in 7 cards, you'd think there'd be a better an even chance, right? If I knew this, it might (along with all the things about reading the action you mentioned) go a long way toward whether or not I bet or call a marginal hand on the river.

You seem like a bright math guy, any simple percentages available for the simple-minded?

[Tha Stunna]

I'm not much of a razz player; be warned.

Actually, the chance that villain has paired is much less than dealing out random low cards would predict. If villain doesn't suck, then he doesn't have an 8 in the hole; it's not healthy to draw to an 8-7 low. That means you are only ahead if the three paired him, and you already have a three.

This would be less true if he flat called in a late position before anyone entered, for instance.

One benefit of raising is that you can fold unimproved on the river if he 3 bets; you know you are beated, unless villain has steel (or perhaps just iron) balls. There's also an off chance that he's very loose-aggressive (which I suppose also means that he has steel balls), but you should have noticed that by now.

I don't have a recommendation here, but if he sucks then just raise.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not much of a razz player; be warned.

Actually, the chance that villain has paired is much less than dealing out random low cards would predict.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've only been playing a few weeks myself. I was asking a more general question - should probably go find the right forum for it. I was asking generally because anytime the player pairs anything, me or my opponent, it strongly affects the probabilities of making a hand at all. I'm trying to figure out how common it is, so that if I don't see a pair, what is the chance he is paired?

But I'll go find a better forum for this question and a better way to frame the question.

[Johnny#5]

I think your approach to the problem needs to be adjusted a little. Drawing an analogy from hold'em here isn't that useful IMO because your opponent's hand is not a random hand. He's not gonna have KJ or Q7 or 44 unless he's retarded so a percentage based on randomization is rather useless in razz.

What's important isn't how many cards you have seen, it's which cards you've seen that is important and how they relate to your opponent's range. Each situation is unique and a product of the exposed cards, which makes it more complicated because you don't share board cards like HE. If tracking exposed cards and continuous odds calculation are overly daunting then maybe stud games aren't for you. In HE you can get by with memorizing relatively few fairly standard situations (pair vs. overcards, AK vs. AJ, TP vs. NFD, bottom 2 vs. TPTK, overpair vs. OESD, etc.) You can do that in stud as well but to a much lesser extent.

To figure out how often he's paired, regardless of the situation, you need to:

1) determine the range of hole cards you think he has
2) count how many of these cards are exposed or have been exposed
3) count how many unseen cards pair him
4) divide by total number of unseen cards

Each situation will be different. He may give away that he's paired by giving up on his hand. He may give away his down cards on earlier streets. If he reraises your open with a 3 up with his 5 up and he catches 46 you're probably in deep [censored]. If he reraises your open with 3 up with his 5 up and he catches A2 you probably have a better chance even though this board is scarier. See the difference?

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
Each situation is unique and a product of the exposed cards, which makes it more complicated because you don't share board cards like HE. If tracking exposed cards and continuous odds calculation are overly daunting then maybe stud games aren't for you. In HE you can get by with memorizing relatively few fairly standard situations (pair vs. overcards, AK vs. AJ, TP vs. NFD, bottom 2 vs. TPTK, overpair vs. OESD, etc.) You can do that in stud as well but to a much lesser extent.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, in other words, razz is more complicated than HE?