Stud/8: Live Flush Draw with a Brick in the Door

[AlanBostick]

You're playing in a $20-$40 high-low seven-card stud with an eight qualifier for low. Antes are $3 each, and low card brings it in for $5, completing the bet on third makes it $20 to go. You don't have to worry about Southern-California-style action bets in this game.

The 3/forums/images/icons/club.gif brings it in for $5. The Q/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif, 9/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif, and 6/forums/images/icons/spade.gif all fold, and the action is on you. You've got the 2/forums/images/icons/heart.gif and 3/forums/images/icons/heart.gif down and the K/forums/images/icons/heart.gif in the door. Yet to act are, in order, the 7/forums/images/icons/club.gif, the J/forums/images/icons/spade.gif, and the 4/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif. All of the players yet to act, as well as the bring-in, are reasonably solid players who grasp the essentials of stud/8.

Your choices are to complete the bet to $20, to limp in for $5, or to fold your hand.

The argument for limping is that a live flush draw with two low cards, while playable, is not very strong, and you'd like to see how well you catch on fourth street for as cheaply as possible. Also, limping makes it more likely that more players will trail in after you, sweetening the pot should you make a hand.

But there is an argument for completing the bet here: In this spot with a hand like (2/forums/images/icons/heart.gif K/forums/images/icons/spade.gif)K/forums/images/icons/heart.gif I would almost certainly make it $20 to go, hoping to get head-up with a single low draw. If I limp with my flush draw, my opponents will know that I don't have a pair of kings ... and that means that by far the most likely hand for me to have is a flush draw with two low cards. Raising to $20 plausibly disguises my hand, and it will make it rather easily to take the pot down with a bet on fourth street if my opponent(s) brick up.

Which costs me more: the extra money I put into the pot by completing to $20, or the knowledge of my hand I give to my opponents by limping?

Is this dilemma troubling enough to justify a fold in this spot? (This would imply that the only live flush draws that include a brick that I would play would have low cards in the door.)

[Rick Nebiolo]

Alan,

This hand just has to be too strong to fold. The two low cards adds value in the cases you end up against one or two of the other low hands yet to act.

I don't like limping because it gives away that you are probably starting with a three flush (unless you routinely limp with big sets).

The raise seems best IMO. Worse case is you get called by two or three lows and brick out on fourth street. But when you hit your best cards (low hearts) you have a strong two way hand that is disguised. If you hit a king you clear out all but the best low draw. And a non heart low keeps you in contention if you can see another street for one bet and your opponents aren't too powerful.

I'm zonked now and hope you check out the stud/8 hand I hope to post tomorrow. Yeah, it involves that crazy California action kill.

Regards,

Rick

[Ray Zee]

the most important consideration is how often you think you will win the pot right there. that wasnt considered so the decision to raise or not cannot be debated.
this is a good hand in this spot in some games and danger in others. he should fold as he has indicated he plays predictably and that makes these hands trouble, as it too easy to bully around someone you can put easily on a hand.

[Ray Zee]

Alan, if you play in any way that your opponents can know what you have you are way too predictable. in these stakes the players play well enough to make you miserable. you definetly need to vary your play of many hands on third street so its impossible to figure out exactly what you have that early in the hand.
this is the kind of situation that really benefits from stalling a little and peeking to your left to see what your opponents are going to do. as the number of them affects your play of the hand.

[Andy B]

I'm going to post this before reading Rick's and Ray's responses. No way in hell I'm folding. Whether or not I raise is dependent on who is behind me. If I am unlikely to steal the antes, I'll limp in and hope I make something. There are three cards in the "play" zone behind me (including the bring-in), which would make me lean towards limping. On the other hand, you indicate that your remaining opponents are good players (so why the hell are you in this game?), which makes it more likely that they will fold. I'm going to say raise, because you may buy the pot now, or you may be able to buy it later if the lows bust out. If you limp with a King in the door, it screams "flush draw." If you never raise with a hand like this, you will be easy to read.

Raising probably doesn't cost you much. If you limp, someone may raise behind you, but if you raise yourself, it is much less likely that someone will re-raise.

I recommend that you catch the A/forums/images/icons/heart.gif on fourth street. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[AlanBostick]

Ray Zee wrote: this is a good hand in this spot in some games and danger in others. he should fold as he has indicated he plays predictably and that makes these hands trouble, as it too easy to bully around someone you can put easily on a hand.

The situation I described is an idealization of an actual hand I played in the $50-$100 stud/8 game at Binion's last weekend (ante $10, bring-in $15). I had recently been moved from a cushy must-move game to the tough main game.

I got dealt a live flush draw with a queen (not a king) in the door, with the other upcards such that if I did have queens it would have been the best pair showing. I was concerned enough about mixing up my play that I decided to represent the pair and raise. One opponent called me and caught a fourth street king to my offsuit low card; he checked to me and I bet. He checked to me and I bet again when I caught a suited baby, giving me four to a low and four to a flush; but he check-raised (he had caught a brick), and I called. I made my flush on sixth and raised him when he bet into me; he three-bet me. I called, and called his river bet. He showed three kings, and I took the pot with my flush.

I was genuinely embarassed -- although I like to think I kept it to myself -- when I stacked the chips. I was sure the good players were thinking, what a live one; he sure overplayed that hand on the early streets; he just got lucky.

It isn't that I want comment on the play of this particular hand -- it felt to me like it pretty much played itself from fourth street on -- so much as I want to know about the value of deception on third street compared to the value of bets and raises. (And I set the hypothetical hand in a 20-40 game because I didn't want to come off as boasting about playing 50-100. /forums/images/icons/blush.gif )

I note that the other guy played his hand in such a way that if I had had what I represented I would have been in deep kimchee even if he hadn't spiked his two-outer on fourth street.

[Rick Nebiolo]

alan,

you displayed a lot of smarts and class posting the hand as a 20/40 hand. i imagine at the WSOP the back home 20/40 players are stepping up so what you did works best for the post.

at the Bike they are "chaining" the must move in the 20/40 stud/8. yesterday with four games that meant a player in the newest game has to move to the third game then the second game then the mother of all main games. i think this is overuse and unnecessarily cumbersome implementation of a must move. someday this may be worth a thread of its own.

hero is finally learning to play the system. when the next game in the chain sucks hero takes a break when she is forced to move and kills the hour time penalty required to recycle into the newest 20/40 stud 8 game by playing in a 10/20 or 15/30 holdem or even the 6/12 Omaha where she is the designated fish. some of her best results come in a live, short must move 20/40 stud/8. of course it's hard to overcome the cost of being an omaha fish /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

More later...

~ Rick

[AlanBostick]

at the Bike they are "chaining" the must move in the 20/40 stud/8. yesterday with four games that meant a player in the newest game has to move to the third game then the second game then the mother of all main games. i think this is overuse and unnecessarily cumbersome implementation of a must move. someday this may be worth a thread of its own.

That same 50-100 game at Binion's over Easter weekend had a chain of must-move games feeding it as well. The pattern of the games was that the entry game was generally quite good and the middle game was tougher but beatable. The main game, though, was trouble. You didn't want to play in it unless you were quite clear there were people there you could beat.

And during the times I spent in it, the players in the main game were the meanest, worst tempered group of players it has been my misfortune to play against. They were terribly hard on the dealers, and they grumbled and fussed when they took beats.

At one point there was a list of about five names on the board for stud/8, in addition to two full must-move tables. The guy in seat one had just made second-best hand both ways and had thrown his cards across the table. I said, "You know the world has gone crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, France is calling the US arrogant, the Germans don't want to go to war, and twenty people are lined up to get into this game!"

[DanS]

"I said, "You know the world has gone crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, France is calling the US arrogant, the Germans don't want to go to war,..."

Alan,
I think that use of a Chris Rock quote, while clutch, may have been lost on the 90 year old inhabitants of Binion's!

Dan