Razz 8/16 - steal didn't work, how to proceed?

[jbrennen]

[ QUOTE ]
When you check it again on 6th I think he has to read that for "I can't beat a 7".

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't check 6th -- he was first to act showing a Jack vs. my Queen.

[RustyBrooks]

Oh, my mistake. I have never liked the way this converter shows action.

[HOWMANY]

I'm pretty sure your hand is way too rough to call on 3rd.

[ChipsAhoya]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you check it again on 6th I think he has to read that for "I can't beat a 7".

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't check 6th -- he was first to act showing a Jack vs. my Queen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I messed this up in the original reply. You absolutely cannot fold 3rd or 4th because the pot is so big. It's right to call bricking off on 4th after a complete and a re-raise and your hand is much better than a brick both because you do have a 9 and that 9 is hidden. You're a little better than 2:1 vs. (7-7-3)7 and you're getting a little worse than 2:1 to call down to the river, which you don't have to do all the time.

I have only seen a few people slowplay 5th in razz and barring a read, I would imagine this person isn't one of them. It not likely to be a slowplay because a made 7 does not want to give a free card to a 6 draw. It is possible he feared you have a made 6, but I feel that it is a lot less likely than him having also paired, too. Maybe you c/c then instead of raising. A raise might get him to fold instantly if he is paired though (small chance) and that would be a huge win for you, too. Also, a raise can get you a free showdown.

At this point you are only 30% against his range, but you are getting 5.78:2 (2.89:1) on a call down and so those are good enough odds. Especially considering the 5th street check certainly weights his range towards the bottom end of having paired. I really don't see any place to drop this. The big ante structure on FTP means you have to make some call downs like this sometimes.

-ChipsAhoya

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
I have never liked the way this converter shows action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Suggestions?

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're going to fold it's on 5th, a fold on 6th may be prudent too.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have always found folding to a check very distasteful.

[RustyBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have never liked the way this converter shows action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Suggestions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Show the checks... even though the first action is bold it's easy to get confused or mixed up. [Edit: In the case where the first to act bets it would still be confusion... maybe something to show who goes first?]

Action wise I think it would actually be better the way holdem converters go, like "Seat 1 checks, Seat 2 bets, Seat 3 raises" but with stud-type games you'd have to match that back up to the up cards and that would cause even more confusion, so I think that's fine how it is.

[Andy B]

The converter does show the checks. Not sure what you're objecting to. We've got the first action in Bold and you just read down from there. I've gotten quite used to it over the couple of years that it's been in place, and I can't think of a better way to do it. FWIW, I generally find converted hold'em hands hard to read.

[RustyBrooks]

Hmm, you're right it does show checks. For some reason I thought it didn't, even though it's right here in this hand.

I do know I get confused a lot about the action. I'll try to pay more attention I guess.

I also guess I've read about a billion hands of converted holdem and it reads easily to me. I've only been reading stud hands a month or so.

[betgo]

Villain's check on 5th is strange. Is he trapping? Did he pair? Was he restealing with a weak hand? Is he checking because he is behind on the board?