Stud - style of play - discussion

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
The worse an opponent is the more one should play textbook poker against them.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last stud cash game hand I ever played was against this newb. I had 4 diamonds on my board showing to him, and had been betting the entire way. He calls me down with ace high. Turns out it was good.

[/ QUOTE ]
[x] Bluffed at a fish
[ ] Rebought and value betted him into oblivion
[x] Better play than calling if you had open deuces
[x] Bluffed at a fish

[Phanekim]

Actually...It was a 10 buck bonus I got at UB like earlier this year. I ran it up to like over 120...until this hand happened.

The real reason I was able to run it up is that i refused to play games where it was full ringed...with 8 people. I tried to play shorthanded 4-6 people. Don't ask me why, I"ve always done that. I just think my edge is greater shorthanded.

So yeah, I bluffed at fish, but if you frequent online cash games, there really aren't any fish out there. So with limited info on him, I did that. I just thought I'd share cause if you play enough hands, you got some interesting stories to tell and would illustrate chucky's point.

Should I have kept going? Probably, but I had cleared my bonus and didn't feel like playing no more.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
Should I have kept going? Probably, but I had cleared my bonus and didn't feel like playing no more.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's cool. The rake is pretty obscene at those limits, so without a bonus or rakeback you're not likely to clear a lot of $$. I was just pointing out that a player like that is very exploitable once you know how to exploit him.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Pra

"I managed to be a moderately successful Hold 'em player by memorizing some percentages and playing just on instinct, for the most part."

Memorizing some percentages? Could you explain some Hold'em examples. Thanks

[/ QUOTE ] To some guy whose screen name is "CPA?" Right. OK, 65% of all poker hands are won by one or two pair. (Not Razz, of course.) So, when I had two pair, unless I was sure I was beaten, I'd usually go all the way.

Gut shots are too low probability to bother with, open-ended you stay in for a bit - open-ended with a flush draw you are a favorite against any pair(s) after the flop.

BUT it's NLHE - doesn't matter what cards I have, really. Just matters how I play the board and recognizing when someone else really does have a hand. Table image is everything. Online, anyway. They are, for the most part, kids. I'm not. That's the advantage there.

In Stud, more players are more experienced, I think. (Read: older.) I think the advanced play is more subtle, tougher. I never played poker at all until a couple years ago. Never played any form of Stud until about a month ago, so what do I know?

I just like stud. I like Razz. I like Stud hi-lo. I also like theory better than maths I can't calculate anyway.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
At lower limits, playing very much textbook and pure odds based / value betting will see you as a solid regular winner.

As you move up, using more knowledge based on reads and instincts is a requirement, and this also passes over to short handed and especially heads-up games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is what Sklansky was referring to - some players who work up to higher limit games using strict probability poker, don't know how to play past 3rd street. I'm thinking that a young guy with great math skills can just "get it" and clean up at low limits, then move up so fast he doesn't have the time to learn what I'd call "craft."

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a very important point. Playing an winning instinctive game requires that you play by the percentages in most cases even if you don't "know" them or calculate them out in your head. For example, if you play a medium pair with a gutshot draw on 5th st enough times vs. enough opponents with enough types of boards you can instinctively put the villain(s) on a hand and decide your best action based on how likely you are to be ahead, how likely to draw out, how likely to make them fold etc. It takes a ton of experience to get it right however, and knowing the math is a terrific shortcut.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this is why I like Razz, I think. Whatever math there is is much simpler, no flushes or sequences or whatever. It's pretty basic to know that A23 is gonna be a better hand than 678. You don't need anyone to tell you that, it's so simple. I was reading the FT forum once (I never post there, you have to use your handle) and in the Razz section someone was telling a newbie that there is almost no bluffing in Razz, if people bet, you should assume they have a hand.

I wrote her name down.

But I think at Razz, being probably the least popular stud game, you get more of the experienced players at lower limits because there is often no game at mid-levels. So it's a pretty mixed bag. At PStars, it's the only Stud variant I saw that had no real "micro" type games, like 2/4 cents. So, to play you have to be able to shift those gears between one hand and the next. It's really challenging.

Oh, after something else you posted, my new VPIP at full table on PS is a whopping 22%! My bankroll thanks you.

[RustyBrooks]

I think Doyle Brunson once made the point that there were now a lot of great young players because they have the opportunity to play lots and lots of hands at a young age. Definitely true... playing in a casino I see 35 hands an hour, on the internet playing holdem 4-tabling I could see 250/hour easy. So in a 4 hour session I'd see 1000 hands, the same number that your average grinder might see in a *week*. When I played part time this means I was playing something like 5000 hands a week. Home games are even worse, you're lucky to get 20 hands/hour in.

He also claimed that he got a feel for how often draws came in by dealing them out for himself over and over again. Personally, I like doing the math but that's just my background.

Knowing a little math can be a dangerous thing. I saw lots and lots of misconceptions while playing live among (relatively) sophisticated players. My favorite had to do with determining drawing odds in holdem. You take you # of outs, say, 8 outs to make a flush, and divide by the number of unknown cards, which on, say, the turn you know 4 cards on the board and 2 in your hand so there are 46 unknown cards and your odds of making the flush are 8/46. Several times I saw people who thought that it was more like 8/26 because of all the cards that had already been dealt to people (that they didn't know the value of). I did not clear this up for them. It definitely cleared up why they called on draws so much.

[Poker CPA]

"Instinctive" rules stud. "Percentage" is only one area of "probabilities". "Probabilities" is only one piece of the foundation that support instinctive. I don't play stud/8 or razz, they could be different.

Weak tight players use "COULD BE this percentage", while the expert uses "Probabilities".

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
"Instinctive" rules stud.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Seriously. And how would "instinctive" be defined in this case? Anything not "percentage/probability?" (BTW, it's Sklansky in SoP who used the terms interchangably, I think I quoted the sentence.)

I was playing Razz in PStars one day last week and this gut was taking FOREVER to play very street, all the time. He wasn't multitabling Razz and I finally decided from the way he played, that he had a simulator open and was putting all the cards in and betting/folding accordingly. After he lost about half his buy-in, he suddenly started playing normally and made some of it back.

Assuming Stud is similar and your observation is correct, why is it instinctive more than probabilistic? (is that a word?)

[Poker CPA]

I said the following:

"I don't play stud/8 or razz, they could be different."

Enter the stud "maze" with just percentages. You'll get KILLED

Do you play strict percentage poker?

NO

Do you think Sklansky is correct here about instinctive players having an advantage from 4th onward?

YES, this is the stud "maze"

Do you think percentages become less important as you progress through a 7 card hand?

Probabilities are very important, so NO. Percentages are only one function of this area.

I don't think its a word.

My definition: = feel