Who are the better hand readers?

[Duke]

Let's limit this to Stud and Hold'em. Which game's experts are better at putting a player on a hand?

I'm leaning towards Hold'em, because without as many exposed cards to discount, you're forced to use your other knowledge of the player every single hand to put them on something. You're forced into developing your "intuition." Forced more into knowing the player?

Am I way off base here, or does someone (dis)agree with m?

~D

[tewall]

Your asking which games experts are better at putting a player on a hand and reasoning that HE's are better because they have less information. That reasoning doesn't make sense to me. I understand the argument about having to develop intution, but don't see what that has to do with whether stud players or HE players would be better at putting an opponent on a hand.

[Duke]

That's not really what I meant. Poor wording.

I'm guessing that a Hold'em player, who starts to play Stud, would be better at reading a hand than someone who only played Stud, because they had been forced for so long to fine-tune their player-reading abilities with no data, and the wealth of additional data that they'd get in a Stud game would make the opponent's hand an open book to them.

I could be way off base.

However, I did not mean to say that less information = better decisions. You're correct, that would be insane.

~D

[SoBeDude]

I would guess hold'em because there are fewer cards IN PLAY that cannot be seen.

In 7 stud, on 3rd street 1/3 of your opponent's hand is visible. Half on 4th street. On 7th street 4/7ths are known.

In hold'em on the flop, 3/5ths of this hand is visible. On the river, you can see 5/7ths of your opponent's hand.

Combine that with position and chip action you should be more accurate at reading in hold'em.

Just my thoughts!

-Scott

[Tommy Angelo]

"I'm guessing that a Hold'em player, who starts to play Stud, ..."

We can use me as a test case. I got barred from my regular hold 'em games for a while in the early 90's. I knew about a $30-60 stud game going two days per week near Washington DC. I bought Ray Zee's book and read it a few times driving across I-70. (Main thing I learned from the book was not to play yucky pairs with a overcard.) (<--hugely useful info)(It is the main trap in stud, sorta like calling raises from the blinds in hold'em. :-) )

I got to be pretty decent at the game. And I liked it. Even now, if I'm at the Mirage or Bellagio in Vegas, I'll play some stud because they don't have it here. I like the pace. And I like being able to sit out a hand or two anytime without worrying about blind considerations.

But I never came close to being able to read stud hands like real stud players can read stud hands. I got just good enough at it to realize it was an artform unto itself.

"I could be way off base."

I think so.

Tommy

[AmericanAirlines]

I think there's two answers here.

If you mean "who's more skillful at reading the player" I'd say HE players since they don't get to see to much of the deck.

If you mean, "who's reads are on average more accurate" I'd go with Stud because more of the deck is seen.

But as a counter point perhaps not. The additional deck info available to the Stud player may make it more possible to play statistically and not need or try as hard to put a player on a hand.

My personal approach to stud reading was to read that board and determine how many of the hands that would beat me an opponent *could not have*.

Sincerely,
AA

[Josh W]

Duke...I gotta say that it is tough to quantify as you've put it.

Let's put it this way....if a lifetime holdem player went to play stud, the same day a lifetime stud player went to play holdem, who would read hands better? I think that a lifetime holdem player would be better.

Note that this does NOT mean that the lifetime holdem player is a better stud-hand reader than the lifetime stud player.

Put another way...for the first time in history, this saturday, a new game will start. Each player gets dealt 3 cards. Face cards are 10 points, aces, 11, all others are their numeric value. The goal is to have the highest point total in your hand. And heck, lets say one of the three cards for everybody is face up.

Lets say the betting is 3 rounds. There is a small ante, but it is limit betting. Who would win the most in this game (where outs, drawing, counterfeiting, etc... is worthless)...a lifetime stud player or a lifetime holdem player? I think holdem. Maybe it's because I have a bias, as a holdem player.

Josh

[J_V]

I feel like stud is a game of beauty and hold em is a game of beating down monkeys with your rusted wrench.

[rigoletto]

I tend to disagree. I not sure who would be the best hand reader, but I don't think is easier to read hands in 7-stud in general.

Seven stud is a more complicated game than hold'em (more cards to keep track of, position changes, the river is concealed). Yes you se more of the deck in stud, but because of the flop in hold'em it's much easier to put an opponent on a hand early in the game and on the end you know everybodys rivercard.

The question is if the most complicated game also hones your hand reading skills the most? I have no clue!

[rayrns]

I went from Stranger to Journeyman to Monkey. All in one week. What a trip!!