The weirdest stud high hand I've every played

[bigredlemon]

7 Card Stud High ($.25/$.50), Ante $.10, Bring-In $.15 (hand converter (http://www.geocities.com/greenage22/7StudConverter.hta.txt))

3rd Street

Seat 0: xx xx T/images/graemlins/heart.gif___calls___calls___calls
Seat 1: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif___folds
Seat 2: xx xx J/images/graemlins/spade.gif___raises___re-raises
Hero: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___brings in___re-raises___calls
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___calls___calls___calls

Limp reraise trying to get HU with the J. He could just be stealing too, so I'm hoping my show of strength could win it there. If not I have two live hidden overcards on everyone. When he 3bets I'm worried about a big buried pair so I flat call it.

4th Street

Seat 0: xx xx T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif___calls
Seat 2: xx xx J/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___calls
Hero: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif J/images/graemlins/heart.gif___calls
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif___bets double

When I saw the double bet on the 88 I was heading straight to the fold button. But this being the last hand of the night and I maybe the lack of sleep was getting to me, I decided to see one more card. I'm almost certain I made a bad call here.

5th Street

Seat 0: xx xx T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif___calls
Seat 2: xx xx J/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___calls
Hero: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif J/images/graemlins/heart.gif 4/images/graemlins/club.gif___calls
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif___bets

I still have crap, but so does everyone else. I'm pretty much looking for runner runner to have any chance of winning.

6th Street

Seat 0: xx xx T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif A/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks___calls
Seat 2: xx xx J/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/club.gif___checks___calls
Hero: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif J/images/graemlins/heart.gif 4/images/graemlins/club.gif Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif___bets
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks___calls

I made queens. I bet here because it'll only get checked if it's the best hand. Checking will also announce I dont have two pair, and betting out here now gives me the chance to bet again on the river hoping anyone who didn't hit two pair will fold. Given the strength I showed PF, i'm hoping for some folds too though I doubt they'll comply.


River

Seat 0: xx xx T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif A/images/graemlins/heart.gif xx___checks
Seat 2: xx xx J/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/club.gif xx___checks
Hero: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif J/images/graemlins/heart.gif 4/images/graemlins/club.gif Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif xx___checks

Standard check.


Results: I win??? I wanted to ask if there's been some kind of mistake here because I'm sure my queens are the worest hand. I guess it takes a fish to beat a fish.


_____________________________

Thoughts on 4th and 5th? Is folding clearly the right play, or will you call too?

[Michael Emery]

This was posted as a joke right? If it wasnt I suggest you stay at .25-.50 where you cant do severe damage to you bank account by playing like you did. If it is a joke I must admit it is very funny. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Mike Emery

[DeadMoneyOC]

What are you doing!

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts on 4th and 5th? Is folding clearly the right play, or will you call too?

[/ QUOTE ]

4th: Call only if I've hit the lottery recently and have lots of money to burn.
5th: See 4th.

I swear your alter ago from this hand was at my MTT table last night. Start with anything, stay with anything, catch just enough to win. Lather, rinse, repeat....

[MRBAA]

"4th: Call only if I've hit the lottery recently and have lots of money to burn.
5th: See 4th."

Do I take this to mean you like the re-raise on 3rd -- LOL

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
Do I take this to mean you like the re-raise on 3rd -- LOL

[/ QUOTE ].

That would be a "no." /images/graemlins/wink.gif

No offense, bigredlemon, but the only thing I see right about this hand is the bring-in. <Quickly checks calendar, determines it's not April 1>. Sleep deprivation? Too much to drink? You really had hit the lottery?

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm almost certain I made a bad call here. . . .
Thoughts on 4th and 5th? Is folding clearly the right play, or will you call too?

[/ QUOTE ]

My instant reaction to the turn play is that you made an awful call. But then I thought about it for a moment. What might your opponent have? If he started with the pair of eights, you're a giant dog (95:5 or so); if he has a small pocket pair, you're an 80:20 dog; and if he started on a flush draw and made the open pair, you're a 70:30 dog. Overall, those hand ranges make you a serious dog, but nearly at ten to one.

I know I'm simplifying. And I'm to lazy to run a bunch of multiway sims. I have a strong suspicion, though, that many of the holdings of the other two players cut into your opponents' equity and not your own. If, for example, the ten door has split tens and the jack has split jacks, your win percentage isn't going to go down my much.

As absurd as it sounds, I think a turn call is correct.

I expect to get flamed.

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
And I'm to lazy to run a bunch of multiway sims.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't run the sims, either. But I will be absolutely amazed if his pot equity is anywhere close to approaching 25% on 4th.

[RandomUser]

You won the pot, therefore your play was exemplary.

Congratulations!

(Btw, what is username and where do you play? I'd like to come and learn from you)

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't run the sims, either. But I will be absolutely amazed if his pot equity is anywhere close to approaching 25% on 4th.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it has to be at 25%. He's getting ten to one for his bet and he's likely to be in last position on subsequent streets. Here's one sim that suggests it's a close call:

pokenum -mc 500000 -7s as qd 6d jh 4c - kh 4h 8h 8d 9d - ts 5c th 6h 7s - jd 9c js td 4d
7-card Stud Hi: 500000 sampled outcomes
cards

As4cQd6dJh 0.095

Kh4h8h8d9d 0.316

Ts7s5cTh6h 0.240

Js9cJdTd4d 0.349

I wouldn't have played the hand the way the OP did. But I thought the criticisms were doctrinaire and thoughtless; when a pot is 10BB on the turn, the range of playable hands is much wider than most people think.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
You won the pot, therefore your play was exemplary.
(Btw, what is username and where do you play? I'd like to come and learn from you)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sir, your snide response is both jejune and unwarranted. If you're going to flame, please do so creatively.

The criticisms leveled against the OP were largely thoughtless; they may have reached the correct conclusion, but it is unhelpful to do so without considering some basics -- like pot size, for example. I do not believe my post suggested the idiotic results-oriented analysis you posited.

[bigredlemon]

[ QUOTE ]
You won the pot, therefore your play was exemplary.

Congratulations!

(Btw, what is username and where do you play? I'd like to come and learn from you)

[/ QUOTE ]UB .25/.5 stud hi. 80% see 5th. I'm the one that's folding every now and then, dragging the average down from 100% staying to 5th. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[RandomUser]

"Sir, your snide response is both jejune and unwarranted. If you're going to flame, please do so creatively."

And here I thought I was being moderately creative in my flame instead of outright calling the OP an idiot.

Congratulations on using jejune in a sentence, however, I've not heard that since English Lit.

[RandomUser]

"when a pot is 10BB on the turn, the range of playable hands is much wider than most people think."

The pot wouldn't have been this big if he had shown some moderation on 3rd street. It is a case of justifying further poor play based on previous poor play.

Using the 10:1 odds on 5th is misleading since he will most likely be putting in at least 3 more BB to get to the river.

He will be investing 3 BB total to win a max 22BB pot which is ~7:1.

If he had merely called on 3rd street, he could have folded to the double bet on 4th street and this hand would never have been posted.

[Bartholow]

Is this one of those hands where you post it from your opponent's point of view?

Even with the huge antes you should probably just fold 3rd, because you can't really expect to knock anyone out at this level.

4th and 5th also look like folds.

6th seems not horrible.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
The pot wouldn't have been this big if he had shown some moderation on 3rd street. It is a case of justifying further poor play based on previous poor play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely yes and absolutely no. I don't like the third street play either. But once it's done, the decision on fourth street is independent.

[ QUOTE ]
Using the 10:1 odds on 5th is misleading since he will most likely be putting in at least 3 more BB to get to the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

We can weight this, too. My 10:1 is optimistic, but your 7:1 is probably pessimistic. The OP does have the advantage of position.

[ QUOTE ]
If he had merely called on 3rd street, he could have folded to the double bet on 4th street and this hand would never have been posted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The third street play is poor; there is no question. But I think that's a different question than the OP asked. The real point of my post was not so much to defend the OP's play, but rather to point out that much of the criticism isn't well thought-out.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
And here I thought I was being moderately creative in my flame instead of outright calling the OP an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you were slightly creative, but you also happened to be wrong in this case. Like you, I wouldn't go to the OP if I needed brain surgery any time soon, but my post really wasn't results-oriented.

[ QUOTE ]
Congratulations on using jejune in a sentence, however, I've not heard that since English Lit.

[/ QUOTE ]

TY, assuming I'm reading you aright. The online challenge is somewhat overused, don't you think? And the rhetorical responses never seem adequate. I could say that I play in big games, but that seems like a dick-swinging ego contest -- and you'd likely never believe me. I could name-call, but that's likewise a fallacy. Or, I could use an overly pompous word and hopefully get at least a smirk in reaction.

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
The criticisms leveled against the OP were largely thoughtless

[/ QUOTE ]

To the contrary, I think the criticisms had quite a bit of thought behind them. I know mine did, and I'd be surprised if Michael Emery's didn't. A few points:

1. Pot odds and pot equity are two different animals.
2. The fact that a response does not have a detailed analysis of the pot odds or pot equity does not mean the poster failed to take those factors into consideration before typing a short response.
3. The OP called himself a fish, so he was being self-critical of his play. The responses, I think, were made in the same vein as his original self-criticism. If he had been a new poster, or somebody who said, "Hey, I don't play much stud, can you guys please tell me if I made mistakes here?," then I think the tone of the responses might have been a little less harsh and perhaps might have contained a little more basic analysis.
4. You might want to look up "doctrinaire," unless you want to be like the Sicilian in "The Princess Bride" who continually misuses the word "inconceivable."

Maybe a shorter way of writing this message would have been a simple "Lighten up."

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
To the contrary, I think the criticisms had quite a bit of thought behind them. I know mine did, and I'd be surprised if Michael Emery's didn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, then, let me be slightly more precise. Your post didn't articulate any of whatever thoughts were behind it, which suggested to me there wasn't much. You're the master of your own processes, however, so you're going to win this debate. If you say there was thought behind it, I'm not going to challenge your bona fides.

[ QUOTE ]
2. The fact that a response does not have a detailed analysis of the pot odds or pot equity does not mean the poster failed to take those factors into consideration before typing a short response.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But that's precisely why "doctrinaire" is the right word, in the sense of "dogmatic": It's a positive assertion without support. I believe that's an accepted use of the term.

[ QUOTE ]
3. The OP called himself a fish, so he was being self-critical of his play. The responses, I think, were made in the same vein as his original self-criticism. If he had been a new poster, or somebody who said, "Hey, I don't play much stud, can you guys please tell me if I made mistakes here?," then I think the tone of the responses might have been a little less harsh and perhaps might have contained a little more basic analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an entirely fair point. I kinda thought the responses weren't very helpful to the OP; and I thought he was honestly describing himself as a fish. If so, I thought it'd be much more useful to explain the processes rather than suggest to him that his play was akin to burning his money.

I think the fourth street muck is not as supremely obvious as your post suggested, which is what I thought your money-burning reference meant. In some games, against some players, a fourth-street raise is the right play in that spot. Not, admittedly, in a .25/.50 game online.

Part of me did grin at your post, of course, so it's not as though you should take my upbraiding seriously.

[ QUOTE ]
4. You might want to look up "doctrinaire," unless you want to be like the Sicilian in "The Princess Bride" who continually misuses the word "inconceivable."

[/ QUOTE ]

Though I am left-handed, I believe I used it correctly in any event. TPB was a highly amusing movie; did you ever read the book? It's one of the few movies that caught the atmosphere of the book almost perfectly.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe a shorter way of writing this message would have been a simple "Lighten up."

[/ QUOTE ]

So it would. I consider myself rightly chastised. Rereading the tone of my post, it comes off far more seriously than I'd intended.

[Hauser_III]

[ QUOTE ]
Though I am left-handed,

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not left-handed...

I did read the book, to both my boys, and we all loved it, but love the movie more. I don't know how many times we've all watched it.

And, no harm, no foul.

[thejameser]

you mean the weirdest stud hand you played while high?