Basic Question - High Ante's No Fold'em 7Stud

[RobNottsUk]

Tried searching but it failed! [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Have been good citizen elsewhere, so hope you don't mind a very simple question, that has probably been covered before.

What are the right starting hand adjustments for sites where the ante is 20% of the SB, and loose low stakes players, make the pot huge on 3rd street. The players tend to ignore how live their cards are, and are generally calling stations, with some turning to bluff addicts, when they notice a "folder"; they love shooting for sets on 7th street which may or may not be good when they hit.

Isolationary raisers to protect big pairs don't work, and turn 4th, 5th and beyond into a 'shootout'.

In No Fold'em Hold'em, I raise with fewer big pairs, but set mine, but I raise more with big sooted cards, that have broadway str8 potential.

The implied odds on sets, are worse in 7stud, but in some games with small Bring In's, you can limp with very good pot odds.

Are these games too much of a crapshoot to beat the rake? Late in hand the pot odds are so huge, that calling stations aren't really making a mistake calling with almost anything.

Or are they profitable, with good starting hands, good folds and aggressive play with equity advantage?

My starting hand basis, is SS1; with some loosening up for implied odds and the very low quality of opposition hands, and play in unraised pots.

[RustyBrooks]

I don't have any experience with no-foldem-stud but I've played countless hours of no-foldem-holdem.

Playing much tighter is one strategy. You'll lose more often with your premium hands but you'll win MUCH more when you do win.

But I prefer to play more speculative hands, in holdem this means suited connectors, even the small gappers, suited aces and kings, small pairs. I don't play as aggressively preflop as I would in a normal game, because it doesn't have the added advantage you get in a normal game (you might win the pot right there, you might drive out hands that could beat you, you might pick it up on the flop when you bet again) and it bloats the pot.

I beat low-limit-no-foldem-holdem (4/8 through 6/12) for well over 2bb/100, and the rake is pretty nasty. If it can be done for holdem, I imagine it can be done for stud.

[FishSticks]

RobNottsUK -

It seems like that type of game is exactly what any poker player (in any game) is looking for. You WANT people playing garbage hands and calling all the way down trying to suck out. These guys won't care that you're a rock and will pay off your monsters every time. The adjustments in all games is really the same idea - tighten way up, play only premium hands/situations, never bluff, value bet always. When you have the most equity in a pot, it's to your advantage if people are calling down - even if they are mathmatically correct in doing so. Just because they put themselvesin a spot on 6th where they have odds to draw to a 4-outer doesn't mean that you aren't getting the best of it. You will get more swings this way, though. There will be plenty of big pots where someone catches up on the end, and it can get real frustrating. Just remember that overall there will be more pots where you hold up in the long run. If getting sucked out on a lot and the swingy nature tilts you, it may be better not to play in this game.

[MRBAA]

these are the most beatable games there are. For the bring in, play any live flush draw (2 or less dead), any live pair, any str8 draw TJQ or up with less than two direct cards or four one gap cards dead. Base raising on early streets more on pot management for late, less on knocking folks out. Go ahead and pound your made hands against the real stations and maniacs, but also slow play against more loose passive types. In other words, just because opponents bad doesn't make them all the same. Also, don't make big river folds in big pots. Just don't. Remember, some of these players will start with basically nothing, so your pair of Ts unimproved are good way often enough to call one more bet head up in a 10BB+ pot.

[Andy B]

The loose games section of 7CS4AP has a lot of good information for this kind of game.

Be less inclined to raise with big pairs. I'm not saying you should never raise with them, just somewhat less than you would in a "normal" game. Play drawing hands somewhat liberally and stay with them longer. Play big hands fast. Pump big draws. Be prepared for some absolutely sick suck-outs.

[RobNottsUk]

Thank you for your time... I have some comments on the responses, I hope you recognise your extracts.

[ QUOTE ]
The loose games section of 7CS4AP has a lot of good information for this kind of game.


[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks, if I play more 7Stud I'll certainly get it, I have the Hi/Lo split one, but 7Stud8 games are hard to find at time I play usually on site where I have to clear bonuses.

[ QUOTE ]
Playing much tighter is one strategy. You'll lose more often with your premium hands but you'll win MUCH more when you do win.

But I prefer to play more speculative hands, ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I agree I found No Fold'em Hold'em very profitable, and enjoyed multi-way action. If 'tighter' means fewer hands, that's poor strategy in my book, I play more hands but less agressively pre-flop unless it's a wild game pre-flop (where I Rock up and especially in early-pos play sooper-nitty pre-flop).

In 7Stud it's tougher to really pump the pot, because you can't rely on stable position, nor a previous betting round bettor to feel obliged to bet again. As the field, know I'm going to be there with a hand, they tend to be wary of raising me.

Also the very high ante's, and reduced chance of a 'best' hand holding up, would appear to suggest playing tight (few hands) would make it hard to break even that way.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like that type of game is exactly what any poker player (in any game) is looking for. You WANT people playing garbage hands and calling all the way down trying to suck out.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but adopting the right strategy for the game structure is still important.

[ QUOTE ]

When you have the most equity in a pot, it's to your advantage if people are calling down - even if they are mathmatically correct in doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is true, if there's no betting in later rounds. Though you may prefer folds to calls, because good draws are 'raking' a large proportion of each caller's contribution.

However that ignores bluffing, many poor players go too far with hopeless hands, and then finally take a 'shot' at the pot, frequently running you into surprise improved hands, held by a player who you wouldn't need to pay off. As the pot is large, you frequently lose money on the river, which may make a 'best' hand with marginal pot equity unprofitable.

[ QUOTE ]
these are the most beatable games there are. For the bring in, play ... Remember, some of these players will start with basically nothing, so your pair of Ts unimproved are good way often enough to call one more bet head up in a 10BB+ pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for a succinct answer that really answers my question. That makes sense to me and was the area I was heading in, loosening up considerably over a low ante game starting hand advice.

I didn't want to spend a lot of time, heading off on the wrong direction, so I shall look forward to my bone-crushing beats (though they cannot be any worse than my Omaha ones), and give the game another shot, when I'm feeling up for a real brain game!

[RustyBrooks]

My statement about tightening up in loose games has to do ONLY with games that are wild preflop - if you can get 5 players to come along preflop while you and another player cap, then you should be playing SUPER tight and you will profit. This game I play in CA is often like that if the right people are there. Bet, raise, call call call re-raise, cap, call call call, everyone checks flop.

You have to be aware of table conditions because loose games have subtle shifts and missing it can cost you money. Who's on tilt? Who's down to their last 5bb and is about to shove it all in? Who's been berated enough that they're going to at least *try* to play well for 20 hands. Who pays attention to do, and who doesn't?

I'm kind of assuming this is live, also, since you don't see TOO much of this online... if so read Mike Caro's Book of Tells. It's not *quite* as relevant to limit games because there is less on the line with each bet, but I have found it helpful. It should be noted that some naive players have very strong REVERSE tells, that is, their hand is the opposite of what the tell indicates. Also beware the old guys playing stud whose hands shake constantly - it does not mean they have a big hand [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[RobNottsUk]

Well in my earliest bankroll building days online you did.

I am rather sad to see the demise of the classic No Fold'em Hold'em FL game, because I did a lot of work and analysis on how to totally kill those games, and due to the natural variance, the Fish wouldn't notice that I was slaughtering them (I would just look rather lucky rather often, and unlucky on the bad days).

You'll be surprised how online, some of those short-stack 'tells' apply, also around about lunchtime, you should tighten up in early position if anyone posts an early or mid "late position blind", and definitely play raising hands only (even if game was loose-passive before) if it's someone who types something in the chatbox. Online to, I used to be able to read many Tricky players hands, simply by using the strong means weak, weak means strong principal, and also noting the turn card on the river, which almost always told me exactly their hand!

Due to the relative lack of tells versus erratic and unpredictable beginner's online, I honed the Math to the max. I'd have been able to beat the games for even more, if there hadn't been a few Rocks, who'd insist on doing check/call until they "had a hand", and didn't understand pot equity advantages.

In 7Stud, I find the opponents do notice that I'm playing "tight", they throw in unsound raises 3rd (& re-raises) to get me out of the pot. Sometimes also, I can take advantage on 5th, where a "bluffer" is going to pressure me and I have a pair + good draw hand.

This is the main problem I've had in 7Stud, simply Aggro-Fish denying implied odds, raising with trash into huge fields, simply to provoke a fold.

They do notice that you're a Rock, and unless you show some stamina, making calls with marginal hands, that probably aren't really more than a slight money loser, then they will bully and bully; even when they give their money away to another Fish.

Crazy but they feel powerful I guess provoking a fold.

So that's back to 7Stud, don't think too much FLHE chatter would be appreciated in this part of the forum though, I mentioned it only so strategy differences could be highlighted.

[Red_Diamond]

[ QUOTE ]
these are the most beatable games there are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, a place I play at has ante as 25% the SB, and Bring-in is 50%. I assume that's as high as it gets for on-line.

From my reccords, I've only seen ONE person with over 1K hands, that was still in the black. Though there is another person with over 800 hands and is in the black too. I don't doubt this person may make it past the 1K mark.

So, either these two are high-ante messiahs, or this is just statistical variance. But I've seen many players, who have grinded it out day after day there, and can't even break even due to rake. These are your types who also study the books in and out when not playing.


So, if these roller coaster rides truely are your best games for making $$$, then god help us.

[Andy B]

Party's $.50/1.00 has a $.25 ante and $.25 bring-in. I think Pacific had a similarly ridiculous structure for games as high as $15/30 at one time.

Don't know what your limit is offhand, but I'll make two points:

1. At very small limits, the rake is excruciating. The games are beatable because the players are so bad, but the rake really eats into your earn.

2. Anyone who can beat these games can probably also beat a bigger game, presumably for more money. They may not feel compelled to play the smaller game long enough for you to log 1000 hands for them.