2/4 Stud High- 554

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
2) Everyone (or at the least 6 players) in the pot... (obviously for pot odds)........................
Which again if i am reading this converter thing correctly... hero couldn't have known given his position.

[/ QUOTE ]FYI, 2 players had already called before the raise, and in this particular structure no one is ever going to call and then fold to a raise (since both the initial call and the re-raise are 1/2 a bet). I was certain we were going to have 4 to the flop, if not 5 (since the bring in will often call here as well).

Not say the call was correct- just that I believe I had a reasonable expectation of a multiway pot.

Anyway- thanks again for the feedback. Hearing how you approach these hands helps me more than you probably realize.

[CJC]

Hi,

you don't want 4 or 5 players though... that's the absolute last thing you want... In my posts above I explain that you want it heads-up or with (basically) all.

When you have excellent re-raising position as you did.. even with the first 2 limpers they will often fold when it is 2 bets back to them.... (but often call when it is only one... which happened)

My whole point to my posts was.. that
1) the hand was much much better off playing shorthanded if it was going to be played
2) There was opportunity to attempt to get shorthanded and even best-case heads-up
3) 4 or 5 way isn't what you want with small pairs
a) you will most likely be outdrawn w/o getting correct price
b) when i said play them with most eveyone in.. you then most often are geting good enough price to try and hit perfect
4) cold calling completions and raises (often) is not a winning way to stud


This hand example is actually a very good one for new stud players to study. It is a common situation in stud... and one that has to be handled differently depending on the circumstances... and it is VERY important to understand what to do in order to be a winning stud player.

honestly, I think this hand should have been folded from the start...

I would have played it if my other needed cards were live... then I would have raised.


Regards,
CJ

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
3) 4 or 5 way isn't what you want with small pairs

[/ QUOTE ]so 4 or 5 isn't considered multi-way, then? I figured anything > 3 = multi-way. It seems to me that if this hand is only playable in a multi-way pot if 6 or more players are in the hand it's hardly worth mentioning, as even at this low level I rarely see that many go to 3rd.

[ QUOTE ]
4) cold calling completions and raises (often) is not a winning way to stud

[/ QUOTE ]Yeah- I very rarely cold-call in stud. Of course, I usually don't play low pairs with crappy kicker either . . . this entire hand was an experiment for me.

I actually DO understand how the number of players in a pot affects whether or not you can play a hand and/or how you should play it, but hands like this are uncharted territory for me. I mostly stick to big pairs, standard drawing hands, and pairs with overs, etc.

So let me sum up and see if I get this right-

A hand like this I might cold call if:
a) I were last or near to last and it was pretty clear 6 or more people were going to see 4th
and
b) my pairing, straight, AND flush potential was live

I might also re-raise if:
a) I thought I could get the pot heads up
and
b) my pairing, straight, AND flush potential was live


btw, I do think if I'd raised I could have gotten the pot heads up- enough so that if my hand were a bit more live it could have been the correct play. The cold call was something new because I remembered (vaguely, at the time) this type of hand being a good cold-calling hand in a multi-way pot. I didn't correctly assess how live I was, however, nor does it seem that I have the correct definition of what a mult-way pot is.

[CJC]

Hi

[ QUOTE ]
so 4 or 5 isn't considered multi-way, then? I figured anything > 3 = multi-way. It seems to me that if this hand is only playable in a multi-way pot if 6 or more players are in the hand it's hardly worth mentioning, as even at this low level I rarely see that many go to 3rd.


[/ QUOTE ]

4 or 5 is considered multi-way... and for a straightflush card to have value in multi-way... you should have more than just the flush outs available. (many of your straight cards were dead.. as was your small kicker)

so imho... this should have been played just as a small pair..

I say you could have played it with all(or most) in... cause what you are really hoping for is to spike trips on 4th... then with all the dead money... and implied odds you will get... it would be worth the call.


by the way.... in regards to getting pot heads up ( and i didn't even evaluate the ante structure and such of this game).... it is only worth doing that if there is money in the pot worth fighting for in relation to the bet sizes... otherwise time to wait for an easier battle.

When someone gets real experienced in stud.. they can often play more marginal hands like this and show a modest long term profit... however those people are few and far between.. and to do that you must have good people and board reading skills... along with several other skills too detailed to mention here.

Regards,

CJ

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
When someone gets real experienced in stud.. they can often play more marginal hands like this and show a modest long term profit... however those people are few and far between.. and to do that you must have good people and board reading skills... along with several other skills too detailed to mention here.

[/ QUOTE ]Obviously I'm nowhere near this (and likely will never be), but I figure there's some value to be had in experimenting anyway. It's the stubborn part of me that really tries hard to understand every play I can, whether I can pull it off or not [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Anyway, this conversation has been good value for me, so I got my money's worth (especially since even though I might have made a -ev play, variance let me win a big pot anyway [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] ).

[CJC]

LOL.......

nice chatting with you....

[Johnny#5]

Hands like this tend to play poorly, even in a 5-way pot, because any strong hand you make will be somewhat obvious to the other players, limiting your action and your implied odds. I think the decision is a lot closer if you had (55)4 instead of (45)5 cause even at 2/4 they know to shut down if you pair your door card and you can force some bad folds from overpairs if you make (55)44 and go nuts (and of course good ones if you make (45)55). (55)45 is much better disguised and you may get lots of action from hands you crush punishing your "straight draw" or whatever they credit you for. Also, made straights and flushes will tend to be one bet per street affairs with (45)5 and your 2-pair type hands that you make just aren't gonna win very often at all so your prospects aren't that hot.

So Seat 2 apparently made jacks up or he has the unlikely trips or he is a retard with like wired AA. Seat 3 is apparently brain-dead but now irrelevant and it's impossible to put the others on hands. Your equity is really poor here, this hand is a big turd and I think you should just fold 4th because of that and your poor implied odds. But since you made it to 5th, the hand pretty much plays itself from that street on, you either catch up or you don't.

I think you could get away with playing (A5)5 rainbow here or maybe (44)5 or the like if you're good but for the reasons stated (45)5 just isn't enough hand, 2-tone or not.