I have been occasionally playing the noon HORSE freeroll on Carbon.   It isn’t the same game as that little Stud8 tournament I regularly played on UB.  It should be closer than a NL Hold’em tournament would be.  Yet it doesn’t play anything like it.

My way of playing and doing rather well in the Stud8 tournament was controlling my aggression based on the tournament phase.   And that’s another way of mentioning blind progression.  At UB I had good notes and was able to genotype many of the players.  In a freeroll, your chance of seeing a player you recognize is slim and even then it isn’t likely you’ll get notes with a lot of value.

I haven’t lived up to my expectations in the HORSE freeroll.  I was playing a lot of HORSE a while back — mostly ring.  The HO part I play fairly tight and I consider it my weaker games.  I’m not quite a brick there but it isn’t that far removed.

That HORSE game plays with a lot more aggression/stupidity/blindness.  I’m use to that and usually appreciate their willingness to build a pot.   To many is a negative but one I can live with.   That said, I haven’t done particularly well on this site.  I think I’ve played four of these and made only one marginally acceptable run. I could wax poetic or irate at some of the coolers but that isn’t close to the reason.

The thing about the UB game is that I expected success and had grounds to believe it.  My losing streaks were short; my money and often wins were above the norm.  The only time I was ever as comfortable was with a NL rebuy honeypot I found on the old TonyG site I played while working for them.  I told one friend about it and it was so good she begged me not to tell others.   The reasons there were different though.

The reason here is the structure.  You start with 1000 instead of 1500.   The blinds go up every 7 minutes instead of 12.   That is huge.   10 versus 12 minute blind is huge.  So, throwing in the starting stack, this is giganormous or whatever.The game plan I had on UB is totally out the window.  I can try to adopt and will; but the change will never give me the benefit I had.  Even if I manage to get some money on the site, it won’t be ever quite as good with their 10 minute blinds.

Time has taught me there is a real difference between even 9 and 10 minutes.  And, I have to admit that it something I often ignore.  After all, the site determines that so you ‘get used to’ what is available.  Sometimes it seems close enough that I won’t fully adjust.  Playing this little freeroll has emphasized that leak.

ADDENDUM:

In the “it never rains but…” category, a US appeals court has determined that Cloney Gowen’s suit against FT was wrongly dismissed.  Got to think variance is a bitch.  FT has gone from cash cow to ow! ow!

***************

Here is an interesting take on piracy.

No related posts.

I'm feeling set up by the cards too – at least for this moment. I haven't won my little tournament in over a week. What the cards said to my tables about me hasn't been overly kind.

That may sound like bitching but it isn't. It is simple fact. With it all said and done now, I still mostly persevered and lasted two hour or more. I make the last two tables with regularity. But, when the tipping point came it was a slide instead of the ladder.

By and large, I controlled what the cards said. That isn't about my particular skills nearly as much as understanding the skills of those around me. One of my petty enjoyments is watching the lobby info and seeing who goes out when. Because it is a small tournament, I recognize quite a few of the regular players. And, at this point I can provide a list of those who will cluster to the list of early outs.

Many of them try to speak above the speech of the cards. They get an insignificant card on an early street and try to take control. What comes out is more babble than speech. These are the group that I mentioned. Poker speech is more two-part harmony than regular speech. You and the cards sing together – not in opposition.

The reason I'm playing this tournament and the reason I see my limited success is being the better ventriloquist. My lips don't move while so many can't avoid giving away repetitious lip movement.

This tournament provides a huge comfort level. I can only remember one other regular tournament that did that. It was a Hold'em rebuy of all things. Again, fairly small. It always started with an overlay that was always taken out by those rebuying. I'd watch people rebuy to the point they had to do better than the final table to just break even.

When you can find these little environments, you can have a voice that exceeds that of the cards. The thing is most of us play when we can or wish based on external factors. So, you play happens here and there. Big sites also make it harder to build background. But if or when you find such a situation, you are better than your normal skill set.

With a little work, one can find situations that give a bit of an edge. That's true across the spectrum. Ring and SnGs also have their better situations that add a comfort level to our play. Looking harder for the +EV situations is … well … +EV. With that duh, going looking with the thought in mind.

ADDENDUM:

I've captured a few hands. Nothing unusual in the group. But, they do provide a lot of information. This is a bit of what I'm talking about.

It’d be more helpful with the circumstances of what the big bet was and stack and all.  But each one does tell a little tale of its own about Stud 8 or Better.  If they are too small, click to enlarge.

No related posts.

A chop is sharing the pot instead of winning both sides; scooping is winning both sides. You won't make money if you are always playing for half the pot.  You will chop a lot; but that's just wheel spinning. Even pots that start as family pots are going to lose participants. The mistake is repeated time and again as picture card are routinely used to call the door. The door is the first round of betting with the single card showing. You want to be playing babies. Babies are between ace and eight. The best are single suited. Second best is with an ace. Third comes consecutive babies. The only thing better than that is rolled up – starting with three of a kind. With just this info you can play better than 80% of your opponents.

We talked about bricks and tombstones yesterday. If anything, this happening is worse at S8. The idea is to scoop. Bricks affect both hands so … twice as bad. I also mentioned that the Hold'em mentality creates suffering; but, if you tend toward being a rock, you may have found a new home. Stud8 is a game of fewer hands and easy folds when it is played well. Bluffing is possible but don't even think about it as you learn your way around.

Playing well here lowers variance dramatically. In the stud family, variance in descending order goes: RAZZ, StudHi, Stud8b. The tables are normally full of chasers. Just because they occasionally hit, don't rush to open your game up. It is a temptation that you must resist.

The bring in is a portion of the small bet. It looks cheap. It gets the guy with good looking crap to call. It gets some to complete. Completing is moving it up to the small bet – a raise. They are normally betting an unmade hand. Again, the place to extract value is with made hands. As you are getting your sea lags avoid it – even rolled up or with buried AA and a baby showing. These are nice hands to speculate with. At higher limits and with more knowledge, that isn't always the right thing but, for here and now, relax and let the cards come to you.

Deceptive hands are a joy but not something to try to make happen a lot as a novice. Deception is golden when the other guy is obviously chasing high and you've a high hand that looks like it a low. They can happen in a lot of different ways but let them come to you instead if seeking them.

If you get to 5^th street, the bet become the full bet. When you call at that street, you should have a hand and outs that will take you to the river. This is the street to learn the weak players and chasers. This is a big note taking time.

Executive Summary

Is S8b your game? You'll want to be a near rock or have comfort playing 08 to make this your first stud choice. If you have that discipline, go for it. It is a fun game in the little tournament I play because you can play a bit stupid. (pseudo advanced play) Because of the progressive structure, you can be a bit of a donk and succeed. In ring, this is a game of discipline.

ADDENDUM:

Meet a stupid hand. It was a stupid hand for every player – moi included. It was won by a stupid hand. My only saving grace was getting out when the big bet hit.

What did I have? A small hidden pair and two suits. In a ring situation it is a quick fold, if you aren't a Wizard of Oz scarecrow. I shouldn't have called 4^th street – making matters even worse. I did have enough gray matter left functioning to fold when the big bet hit.

The AA guy is a loose cannon that loves to complete. The TT player is an every hand chaser. The one 'honest' hand needs help to make his 8 low work. In this instance, AA did complete and I stupidly called – looking for lightning in a bottle, I guess.

With the K showing, the guy calling the completion with a Q up can only defend his play with the read on the AA guy that all of us had. Iffy at best. Regardless of what K-up had, he should have also known that the guy wasn't going to check the next street. He hangs in there far to long before getting religion.

The honest hand really gets a brick. OK, it is a pair. But 8's? He hangs around looking for the same bottled lightning I was after but calling on 5^th is basically saying I am in to the bitter end.

TT is a player you love populating your environment. That weak pair – the dregs of broadway – never shows signs of improvement. Not a card from start to finish improves the hand. And both tombstones hit — I had one early and the other came late. She's really chasing one out with every big bet until finally it is zero outs.

Success came to 8's up. Certainly an embarrassing win. Not one hand was played well. It was 40-80 and I needed to see something happen with my below average stack. I came; I saw; I failed.

While this is a tournament hand with vague reasoning for play, this hand is too typical in tournaments but plays out time and again at ring. If you understand poker and learn this game properly, it should serve you profitably.

Related posts:

1. Becoming A Stud
2. Stud and Lobby Reads
3. WCOOP Stud

Stud is maligned by being called an old man's game. And, yeah, I know what I am – don't rub it in. The reason Hold'em took the scene over completely is it is simple to watch. TV knows it is deceptively simple to watch. So, all the other stuff got moved to a back burner. Even the $50K HORSE played out the final table for TV in Hold'em.

Because it is popular, most players that give Stud a go come with a Hold'em bias. This is a much different game. About the only real help is what hand beats what hand. People don't quickly understand that and use the wrong skill set. Most are NL players used to pushing an advantage early and aggressively. Most think two pair is the nuts. They think counting outs is easy and can quickly know whether or not to call.

There is a ton of info on the net about stud technique. The West book is an easy read. If you are anal retentive and do math problems on lunchbreak, the Sklansky book is where to go. It is the master's course in Stud; but, is dense information overload at the git go.

Hand Strength

I mentioned an old book that said the average hand is a set of nines that was laughed at in a chat session when I mentioned it. That's because a lot of hands are won with lesser hands. But, there are a lot of hands that are much bigger. Boats, flushes, straights crop up all the time. So, the Hold'em guy is going to get his buried AA and push it long and hard without regard for what the board shows.

Limit

Coming from NLH is no advantage. Implied odds are out the door and replaced by pot odds. With the tendency at low and mid stakes to see a flop, a lot of hands have the odds to participate. The secret here isn't so much starting hand as knowing when to get out. People usually don't have a clue and well talk about that. If there is one quick thing Sklansky harps on is that aggression should happen late with a made hand. Get this idea firmly embedded in you Stud psyche.

Bricks and Tombstones

Poker terms are an interesting mix. Bricks are cards that don't help your hand. With seven cards your due, the tendency is to discount the first brick. Pot odds may let you hope to sneak on but that puts you in a position of needing help two out of the three times left. You need huge pot odds. It is the most common failing you'll see.

Tombstones are my own contribution. This is about dead cards. The info that develops as cards are exposed on four streets affect you chances at success. Even on third street, there will be information at times that turns a great starting hand into bupkus. An example is having broadway suited. Nice hand. But if two of the suit are up it get a bit iffy and if three are up you can fold. But, the average player only see what he holds. I watched three jacks up on third street and all three participate in the bring-in.

Starting Hands

You'll get more and better info by doing a Google search for Stud tutorials than I am able or willing to provide. There are really two types – strong and speculative. You don't play the spec ones from early position. You reserve them for situations where the pot odds make them workable. In many respects they are a better hand than those considered strong. Why? Hit the first brick and you've limited your potential loss.

Cheating

Not really. It is a tool called Stud Inspector. The free download lets you use it at the funny money tables. It shows the cards played and displays the odds for all the various possibilities. In some respects it is overkill. But, it is a great way to get the feel for how bricks and tombstones dramatically change things. If you multitask better than I do , you might find it very useful. I use it rarely at this point but it is great when you are getting your sea legs and you can decide on that after trying the funny money which is the place to start.

Bring-in and Completing

The game isn't about blinds it is an ante game. Most online sites have a reasonable ante. That's typically under 20% of the small bet. If it is more, then you need to find more hands to play or steal with. Stealing with any three is -EV. Completing in the typical multiway pot is also -EV.

Reads

There is a lot of info that develops playing Stud. On Full Tilt, they shuffle the downs so you don't know which two he began with. On UB they are shown in order – a big plus. You will make money with reads and that means keeping notes. We all do it differently but you want to have something going. I also have Poker Tracker for Stud that give a lot of info. It is a nice help but the software is so-so. I can't recommend it.

Executive Summary

Stud is a great game to add to your skill set. They say variety is the spice of life and, if that is so, you will benefit. The “old man's game” charges hides what can be a very profitable skill. The fish wear billboards. While drawouts are commonplace, the good player has the same chance and is doing it from a more powerful hand. It isn't hard to find loose-passive players/tables. That's a license to steal.

Related posts:

1. Stud and Lobby Reads
2. Stud Eight Player Born Every Minute
3. WCOOP Stud

The women in question is Josie; so put your nudges and winks on a back burner. She is a bit over the top but ain't that stupid. Nothing will be happening that will cause a word play on Long John Silver to mar my Supreme Court nomination.

Josie left a comment in my last post:

Very good post.  Please write more posts like this…esp about stud, which I know nothing about.

I've remarked that friends get cheap shots. Some don't lend themselves well to that but Josie only trails Bammer in playing straight man person to my shoddy humor. So, here's one to kick things off: STUD? STUD? REALLY! I was talking about Stud 8's or better. Difference! Huge Difference! HUGE HUGE HUGE … god I'm starting to sound like over the top Josie. Lets move on.

This blog will cover the trip to where I'm at. I'll try to flesh the rest out as we go along, I hope. I played very little limit. It is where I started online and I sucked. Made the transition to little SnG's and that was my wheelhouse for a fair amount of time. When the HORSE hoopla hit the WSOP, I decided to give it a go. I'd pretty much burned out at Hold'em.

I'd played a bit of Omaha. It was enough to know the basics and to be comfortable with four down. Hold'em? Well, I said I sucked at limit and while I knew Hold'em I can't say I was fully comfortable. The 7-card games were a no-man's-land. That's not a key to great success but playing a tight game kept me from redepositing.

I started throwing in a bit of RAZZ ring. I'm not sure why. I guess it was the first of the family that I started to feel a bit comfortable with.  But, I did have a moment where Chris Ferguson was on his zero to nice bucks project and got to sit at a .25-.50 table with him and even took some of his chips as he busted out. RAZZ is a nasty little game that lends itself more to Waffle's or Jordan's style than my TAG meanderings. Everyone says it can get nasty but that is incrementally above the other seven card game members.

I gravitated from there to Stud. My buddy JB Harshaw played a lot of it and suggested and out of print book that is a good foundation. It is pre-computer and a bit dated. The Sklansky book is far more detailed but it sure was thin and a quick intro. One of the things it said was that the average hand at stud is a set of nines. I said that once in a chat and was poo-poo'd but over time I think it is actually pretty close. We'll get deeper in that as we go along, I hope.

I went from there to S8b by accident. I've been playing at UB and finding a game is iffy. So, when I saw a S8b tournament that was cheap, I used it as a time filler. There aren't a lot of books or info about the S8b game. The only real coverage is in Doyle Brunson's book and those are written by Chip Reese and his son in the later edition. That's ring and I was playing tournaments so even that was marginally helpful. We all know there's a difference between ring and tournament.

Why my transition? Well, I was burned out on Hold'em. The beats can get really frustrating at times. I've played two Hold'em tournaments in the last six months. I won the first and played a single hand in the second. On that last one, I flopped a set of threes, bet solid on the flop; pot bet the turn; lost on the river to K6s. If you followed yesterday's November Nine table you saw worse.

Now the seven card games have even worse suckouts. In fact they are even more routine than the community card games. Well, Omaha high is close but only close. The thing is they are so regular that the beat isn't a blood pressure popping event. That sounds a bit strange but, if you try it for a while, I think you'll share my view.

Well, that's the starter. No great disclosure ever yet. There probably won't be. I operated as a programmer for a lot of years and that is very disciplined. The KISS principle truly applies. I've never been a disciplined individual so how it and poker became a big part of my life is a question. I think the KISS principle is the core of that. Keep It Simple Stupid works. And that little S8b tournament brought that home.

Like my other favorite foil says, “Thanks for dropping by!”

Related posts:

1. Becoming A Stud

I'm not claiming sainthood. I blogged for a paycheck. Truth is that at the start I was as lame and intermittent as the worst I could complain about. And even at our very best I wonder how often we really get it. Too much of it runs on about bad beat, variance, hand histories, highs and lows. That may be a slight excess in living the moment.

I envy people like Doc who had a clear vision of where they wanted their life to go and made it happen. I was never that. I went through a number of jobs that gave me a decent living but little satisfaction. While I attended college and was an adequate student for the most part, it wasn't my education. I'm mostly self-educated or have come as close to educated as I can on mostly my own.

Poker has come to be the second most important bit of self-education I've accomplished. The first was learning computers which brought some semblance of discipline – not a top 5 attribute in my playbook. And, I was able to garner a more enjoyable, although less profitable, livelihood. I was happy with the tradeoff.

Why is poker so high at #2? Well, I can't claim to be a mind reader in the game of life. There was a lot that left me confused or disappointed. We all have those moments. I don't know if mine were more or less than average. Poker, even coming later in life, has help fill in a fair amount of those blanks. That it has has amazed me.

We almost never bring that part of poker to our surface thoughts. Well, it is a lot of fun to bitch or brag or harass the friends we're making along the way. And, when we do live in the moment, that certainly can be a positive. Those represent our day-to-day thoughts and actions. But, for all those people I see enjoying that, I think I'm just watching the little surface current in a river that runs deeper.

Poker energizes thought processes we can easily avoid in life. Poker changes our pattern of thinking. It is Psych, Philosophy and Soch 101s all rolled up into one interesting dynamic. It doesn't come with handouts and boring lectures. It is visceral and challenging. It promotes discipline. And, it doesn't require a traditional classroom.  And, the way education is going, it is a hell of a lot cheaper.

Our great thinkers like Einstein or a Goddard report little encounters that change how they viewed things and brought about new insights. On a good day, poker can do that. At least, it has done some of that for me. If you look a bit closer, I'll bet it has done some of that for you.  Poker really made me a more complete person.

I now return you to my regularly scheduled blog:

Man, yesterday sucked. I was so card dead. And sitting there I had to watch idiots pulling cards out their backside. I went out two shy of the final table and five shy of the money. Not bad considering. But, man, it really did suck!

OK, your turn.

ADDENDUM:

Speaking of idiots, they aren't giving up on poor MickyD.  He's become the evil overlord. San Fran outlawed `em and now folks are all confused about the diabolical, aged Happy Meal.  At the same time they rush to the store for sun dried tomatoes or a packet of salad dressing that has desiccated goodies they restore with some vinegar and oil.  They probably stop by the camping store for some freeze dried meals to take on the hike coming up.  But all that is Yuppie healthy.

No related posts.

Yes, I am sounding like a Jewish mother. Actually, the girl has another Jewish mother. That would be Waffles. OK, now that the shudders have died down and the folks monitoring the seismic charts are left scratching their head…

Really it all related to one of my recent blogs. Josie’s blog seemed a continuation of that blog which was even commented on by Lightning36 – her nemesis. Of course, I couldn't resist pulling her chain with a bit with a little nastygram. (If I’m extra polite to you, there is a fair chance I don’t like you. I reserve cheap shots for those on the bud list.)

There was another interesting blog today from Grange. At first glance it doesn’t seem related. I seem to be writing about one thing, Josie somewhat another, and Grange a third. But, they all fill in parts missing from the other.

I’m not suggesting a fixed conclusion. If you read the three, the conclusion will relate to you more than it relates to poker. But, when you reach that conclusion, I think you’ll be ahead of the rest of the poker world or at least 90% of the poker blogs I read.

ADDENDUM:

It is in the low 70’s here and the humidity is low. The windows are open and a gentle breeze is almost too cool on my right side. There is a break in the horrid weather of the past month. I ran the AC more this summer than any in the past. Today, I get to enjoy that which has been missing almost all that time. I finally drew out on the weatherman.

No related posts.

That usually a modifier to Hold’em. The idea is they chase but then catch at a rate that causes one’s blood pressure to peak. In Mediterranean types, it leads to broken keyboards and flying mice making cracks in the wallboard. Seeing that I’m partial to MS Keyboards and Logitech track balls, it wouldn’t be cost effective to join them.

Waffles reported a truly tasteless bit of chatting on his part. It was tasteless even for him. His next post recognizes the flaw. He isn’t stupid…just angry. Anger has to be channeled or you make the news channel. We see the anger tilt all the time. If fact, Waffles preferred aggression get a bit of +EV from evoking it in others. Somehow when he does it, it resembles greater skill and deserves a chortle in the day’s blog.

The ongoing argument in the poker world is all about luck versus skill. People quote endless data and those smarter or with better memory evoke higher math and splatter charts.

Fairness never enters rational discussion. It stays in the realm of conspiracy theorists that are well represented in blog and forum. Poker was not designed to be fair. It was designed to be unfair. If they could swing it the early players made it unfair to the point of illegality. We express amazement when that reappears online. Calling for fairness is a true DUH! Moment.

What do we talk about endlessly? Fish. Donks. What do the pundits use to admonish us? “Don’t tap the glass.” and “Don’t educate the idiots.” The idea is to pray upon the weak. No wonder a nanny government seeks to eliminate it.

Another thing we seldom talk about is the rake. 99% of us play at levels where the rake is going to beat all but the luckiest. Yes! Luck! Oh, you can throw in some skill but at the low to mid levels that most of us play, luck becomes a major component. While we are erudite and discuss it all as “variance”, the deck/rake is stack in only one direction – the house.

We all know who are pretty consistent in the win column. I don’t really put myself there for a variety of reasons. One who I wouldn’t want to face on a regular basis is B.W.O.P. She’s capable and given a reasonable run of cards will compete. Yet her latest post is really about why most of us play. It is to have fun. That isn’t something most of us will confess to. We probably should.

There are more things that distract us from the real goal. Waffles complaints revolve around SnG play. Lot of fun at times. It was a steady feature in the lobby I’d open. But, unlike ring. It denies table selection. Tournament in general has that feature. Not having such selection is -EV. Yet, it is fun and we set that knowledge aside and end up with some sessions like Waffle’s description and rant bring about.

Most of the time we don’t know why we are playing or we set a lesser objective ahead of our true goals. That mistaken goal supersedes.  That’s as silly as the game gets.

No related posts.

When I started playing HORSE, it was more will than skill. People talk about their better/weaker games in creating a best of five outlook. Frankly, I didn’t have a single one to call my own. I was uniformly mediocre in all five.  The first to develop was stud and that became a ring game I'd play.

My approach was much like my current approach to Stud 8 or better. I said the 8 or better format is not a strength. In fact, it is mostly a weakness. Well, I suck at the split pot games. I’m not patient and have a hard time not playing hands that only appear to have some potential.

Over on UB the S8b side is a bit more active than the Stud side. So, that is an attraction. It is also a great way to hemorrhage. What to do?

The solution could be to drop as far down as possible; see a lot of hands on the cheap. But, I’ve been playing a tournament that is fairly attended but hardly more than a MTSNG. Have won little but am at least lasting past the 2^nd break.

Early play is a lot like playing at a passive table.  Late it is the ideal practice for the aggressive one.  In the tournament to ring game translation, it provides some pretty decent practice.

I found new life in being able to mix up the games. I was pretty burned out by Hold’em tournaments and SnGs. Having a mix of games lets me go back to playing a few without tilting from the boredom. You might give it a try.

No related posts.

I talked about that yesterday for stud play. I’ve gotten to the ‘right’ way by stumbling and dragging myself to this position. It is the opposite of rationality based on other games and blinds. In no-limit, bet sizing rules make it wrong to price in things like flush draws. Many of the bad beat blogs are about the folks who didn’t respect the pot odds offered.  But, in tournament play, I’m not one to really knock it. Sooner-or-later, at-some-point all tournament play is donk play. Are those that implement it sooner than the prudent that far from the true path? That isn’t the case when we talk ring games. And the ideas that work at limit Hold’em with its three betting rounds confuse those who play stud with its five.

When I started off playing stud, I asked for advice from a friend. JB is old school army and poker augmented his pay all the way to retirement and beyond. He gave me some great advices that didn’t work. What worked at his tables which were often 5-10 and up fell flat when I implemented them. You raise (complete) with AA as an example. Early aggression with a purpose isn’t viable at low stakes. Even Sklansky mentions that most completing at lower stakes is -EV.

There weren’t a lot of books out there that are a decent read with decent goals that apply to stud. Sklansky has the best book but his stuff is never an easy read. And, some of his advice requires more patience than even the Buddha could muster. Throw in the new aggression and his originally valid premise is weakened further. Anyway, the book JB said taught him most was an old one that was out-of-print but I found a copy on Amazon. One of the things it said was that the average hand at stud is a set of nines. Now I can’t testify to the science and data behind that claim. I did discuss it at one table and the others were unanimous that it was an overstatement of fact. I think it is right or darn close if a bit off.

At stud – especially under 5-10 – you see a lot of hands that not only win but that their holder is willing to promote that are well under that set of nines. It happens regularly. At the very low tables I play at I see people consistently promoting a weak two-pair hand and winning with it fairly regularly. That makes folks dubious when a claim like 999 being average surface. And most playing stud come from a limit Hold’em background where two pair is almost always thought a nut hand.

But stud has a lot of really big hands. Just how you weight things makes that 999 premise one closer to the fact than the majority of players realize. When you throw in their Hold’em experience, they make even more mistakes. Things are a bit forgiving because even the best players at many tables are far from mistake free players. Figuring outs versus cards remaining takes a mental capacity beyond casual play. I know I don’t have it. But, I can come closer than most of my competition.

While stud is carries more variance than many other choices, it can also reward those with a modicum of understanding below the level of what is remotely standing a chance for profitability at other limit games. Few care about watching for dead cards that would make their hand. I see hands where there are three queens exposed on third street and all three of those players will participate. I see late hands made or not with four card straight and even gutshot ones that are made with the cards on either side having 2 dead cards that were exposed. This is not optimal play or anything close.

What stud can do is reward the tight-passive like no other game. That is another thing that flies in the face of common poker knowledge. It is there because of the number of participants who contribute and build pots that any reasonable drawing hand or made hand want to continue playing. I’ll see the high hand often betting because he has ‘scare cards’ up. I see bad play when the next guy raises with three of a color showing and several behind him. I watch players with 5’s up bet from 4th through 7th street. All this sets up weak-passive like no other game can. Early aggression is usually counter productive. I’m not saying always. Always is a bad word to use at a poker table. But it is the case more often than not.

If you think the fish have dried up with the difficulties in funding, maybe you should visit the stud tables. Play some cheap or even funny money tables to get the lay of the land. And, when you’ve figured it out, please! don’t tap on the glass.

ADDENDUM:

Bit of an example.  I was on UB yesterday evening playing .05-.10 because it was the only active game. I lost a buyin ($1) being a donk.  I was having fun and hardly thinking about a profit. I took a look in the lobby and there was a 1-2 game.  Now Mojo will testify that I don't have the roll to play that responsibly. But, it was 4 or 5 sitting and I had solid notes on two of them.  They were known quantity that I feel I can exploit. 

I sat with one loose-passive calling station.  And the other a hyper aggressive guy that wins his share of 3rd street pots.   Those are small pots.  If he get a caller, he doesn't change — Mr Bet-bet-bet.  The others were people I could get out of the way of if I had to.

Long story short.  Didn't play long.  Left up a buy-in when they got a bit tilted and went to capping.   Gotta love it!

No related posts.