Razz-caution or coward?

[jbrennen]

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you. And would you raise the river on the first hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

At these stake levels, and against a player with no history, probably yes. He'll pay a buck to look you up often enough to make up for the times when you're beat.

But your hand is pretty much an open book, so you need to be careful against a known good player. He could be planning a C/R on the river -- one big difference between this hand and the other is that in this hand you were the last aggressor before the river, so if he outdrew you, going for a check/raise would make a lot of sense.


So basically, this first hand I'd play situationally. Against an opponent who I know to be good, or in a tourney situation, I probably check behind. The lower the stakes, or the more unknown the opponent is, the more likely that I bet the river.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
But your hand is pretty much an open book, so you need to be careful against a known good player. He could be planning a C/R on the river -- one big difference between this hand and the other is that in this hand you were the last aggressor before the river, so if he outdrew you, going for a check/raise would make a lot of sense.

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah, this was my thinking at the time. I was hoping to improve my hand even more, but not doing that, I just checked behind. I think since I am underbankrolled for even .5/1 at this point, I am going to err on the side of caution and decide that's ok for awhile as long as I don't get comatose.

[Raxxmataxx]

I tried looking at hand one, using the excellent calculator from propokertools.com and was a little surprised by some of the numbers.

Here's a breakdown of your equity numbers, in percentage points, from street-to-street, using some different assumptions about your opponent's hand distribution. I also assumed he was going to keep betting, no matter his hole cards, until 6th.

Wide starting range (98-32): 55-35-45-61-49

Medium starting range (86-32): 52-31-38-55-40

Nitty starting range (75-32): 50-30-34-43-31

Quick summary:

* You're never much of a favorite on 3d, even against someone who will play 98A against you.

I'm sure most razz people knew this, but to me it is a surprise. Since most openers are going to have a wider range than 42A it suggests you can be pretty liberal calling opening raises, as long as you don't show your bad cards.

* You're always worse of on 4th than on 5th. So your opponent catching an eigth apparently isn't all that bad.

The call should still be pretty horrendous due to you not having much in the way of implied odds. The only way I see you having those are if your opponent either is calling when obviously beat or going nuts with rough pats when you catch perfect on fifth.

* The seven is pretty much the perfect card for the opponent on 4th. Only 3:s and 6:s are as good. All other small cards are from 2-6 points worse.

* You're not ahead against a nit on 6th.

* Range vs range you're not really ahead against anybody on 6th. An opponent can have a ton of boardlocks and should punish you with a lot of 3-bets and bluffs here.

* You're not ahead against an unmodified range on 7th.

To be able to value bet here you need to be able to exclude quite a few hands from your opponent's range due to him simply calling you on 6th and checking on 7th.

[RustyBrooks]

Well, and further, to value bet you have to expect him to call with ALL of his worst hands, and the truth is that he's folding all of his worst ones and calling all of his better ones. In order to value bet you not only need to be ahead a decent percentage of the time, but you also need him to call with a lot of hands you beat.

[RustyBrooks]

Nice analysis, by the way.

[Raxxmataxx]

Not that I've played a lot of razz, but I wouldn't be too surprised to see the other guy calling all his eights and better.

My general experience in poker is that tons of people just go into calling mode one street from showdown and just stop thinking.

Further, if it's actually true that he'd bet any hole cards from 4th and onwards I think he *should* call down with most, or all, eigths. I'm not at all sure about that, since my intuition for ranges in lowball games isn't good at all. But getting 4:1 on a call down he shouldn't be folding very often.

Also, the fact that the enemy didn't re-pop 6th makes me think something is iffy. Rangewise we're in a 7-3 in favor of the bad guy. Him not 3-betting indicates he doesn't really know what he's doing. If he's better he should value-raise, and if he's worse he should semi-bluff with a ton of hands.

I should also point out that I think that hero's 2-bet on 6th is pretty horrible for the simple reason that the other guy has so very many boardlocks compared to hero's zero. It's somewhere along the lines of raising an A with a 9 on 3d street.

[MikeBandy]

Masculine pronouns refer to both genders.

[ QUOTE ]
if was playing 5/10 I'd have folded the brick. Or even 1/2, most likely. But at .50/1 on Stars - even not knowing the players - it's about 50/50 they have a brick in the hole.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hand One:

You make a good point in stating that the player may have a brick in the hole. When he called on third street, he knew that he'd have only one opponent, whom he hoped to outdraw on fourth street. In that case, he'd have the better board. Even if you called after you got a bad draw, he'd have equalized.

Even so, I'd normally have folded on fourth. After all, according to your guesstimate, there's a 50% chance that he's ahead. Also, you don't have much invested in the hand. Why chase?

Hand Two:

The hand was played well. I'd expect to win it on the river, but I wouldn't have bet or raised.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
* You're never much of a favorite on 3d, even against someone who will play 98A against you.

I'm sure most razz people knew this, but to me it is a surprise. Since most openers are going to have a wider range than 42A it suggests you can be pretty liberal calling opening raises, as long as you don't show your bad cards.


[/ QUOTE ] I read in one Razz book that any three-card 7 or better is worth jamming third no matter what your opponent has. I think that's extreme, but it supports the idea that with any three good cards and one opponent, you have as good a chance as anyone.

Now, I wonder what would happen if we presumed my opponent had one brick (9,T,J,Q,K) in the hole with his two good cards?

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Even so, I'd normally have folded on fourth. After all, according to your guesstimate, there's a 50% chance that he's ahead. Also, you don't have much invested in the hand. Why chase?

[/ QUOTE ]There were a few things - one that we might both have a brick, as I said before, and his just calling the completion on 3rd. And if he had a brick, I thought I would have the better of it. It wasn't like I had 68A, which I would have folded. Then there was the Ace out for us both, but also there were three paint cards and no one else came in. It's .50/1, and three-four players to 4th is pretty standard. I thought there must be a lot of little cards out for me to catch.

I realize that it has become a standard play to raise 3rd to have pot odds to call a brick on 4th. I just never do that. I raise 3rd a lot, I also don't. I fold a lot of 4th street bricks, but I call when I just feel like it makes sense situationally and I almost never use pot odds. Sometimes you get a real big jammed up pot and then of course, I'm seeing 5th if I can.

[ QUOTE ]
The hand was played well. I'd expect to win it on the river, but I wouldn't have bet or raised.

[/ QUOTE ]Thanks, I was afraid it was just too nitty to check but now I think it was the best choice.

[Raxxmataxx]

[ QUOTE ]
I read in one Razz book that any three-card 7 or better is worth jamming third no matter what your opponent has. I think that's extreme, but it supports the idea that with any three good cards and one opponent, you have as good a chance as anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]Well, that's kind of the point. By jamming you've shown you hold exactly good cards for a pretty small gain in terms of big bets. It's also not going to be terribly hard to play against you on later streets if your hole cards can be limit to sevens or lower.

By calling you're range is much wider than his and you give much needed protection for your crappier hands you hope to suck out or steal with.

Note that I'm thinking specifically about playing against someone fairly early who raises. Against that range it's just not possible to have much of an edge with any hand. If you're against someone with a wider range you can actually get a lot more value.

[ QUOTE ]
Now, I wonder what would happen if we presumed my opponent had one brick (9,T,J,Q,K) in the hole with his two good cards?

[/ QUOTE ]You have 2:1 in showdownequity, but your real equity isn't very near that since he's going to fold very quickly when your board is better than his.

I didn't bother to factor it in the simulations above since I didn't think it very likely (I've only played something like hundreds or in the low thousands of razz hands) and that it's a bit bothersome to include in the simulation.

It does seem a little too optimistic to assume that your opponents are going to be playing any two wheel cards with a brick in the hole.