seven stud split/declare home game with odd structure/ante

[scrub]

Hi all. I started playing in a home game at school this year with a structure that I just couldn't figure out how to beat.

The game was played as a spread limit .50-5 on every round but the river, which was .50-10. There was an ante of .50 per player, and the game was usually at least 7 handed. Dealer's choice, but most players dealt split stud/declare. Those trying to scoop lost both ends if they got beat on one end, but could quarter on a tie.

Three of the players were very intuitive players who played very well on later streets, but did not select their starting hands very well and had very loose raising standards. One was tight weak, and the other players were dead money.

The strategy of the wild players seemed to be to get money in on third street with any two good low cards hidden, or any two good low cards with some sort of half-assed additional coordination. The 3-4 dollars in the pot on antes meant that most players called a small raise on third street with anything. Reraising with a premium hand seemed to give up too much information without doing much to thin the field on a strong high hand. In any case, the texture of the game frequently produced pots on the order of 20-30 dollars on third street, giving a lot of hands odds to chase to the river.

Pots were rarely jammed on the later streets until the river. The player fancying themselves to be in the lead would make futile bets for 1/6 of the pot at best, and get called around. Sometimes one of the intuitive, loose players would take over the action on the hand during the earlier streets, and that made it even harder to know where I stood, as their bets were well thought out and frequently deceptive. The river was often jammed to the 40 dollar limit.

I'm really more of a Hold 'Em player, and have never felt that comfortable playing split pot games, but this one gave me a lot more trouble than any other split stud game I've ever played. Any suggestions on what to start with/how aggressively to play on later streets?

Thanks a ton.

[Walter]

>Any suggestions on what to start with/how aggressively to >play on later streets?

In Hi/Lo Declare, you must play hands that look low. If you are constantly playing hands where people know you are going high, you will get eaten alive.

You want to either: (1) go low with a chance of making a two-way hand or (2) have a hidden high hand.

The key is to knock out the people going the opposite way of you so you can scoop. You will not win money consistently unless you play to scoop. It is virtually impossible to scoop if the other player knows you are going high, so you usually have to look low and make a high to scoop.

Good luck!

[scrub]

Thanks for the advice Walter! What do you consider to be good low starting hands in a declare game? (I feel like I end up playing too tight for the ante when I use the starting requirements for split stud with an 8 qualifier that Ray Zee reccomends in his split pot book...) Anyone else care to weigh in?

[chaos]

I think Zee's starting requirements are pretty good for this game.

Beware of high hands that can be easily overtaken. I am refering to hands like a pair of Ks or Qs. These are only playable if no higher card is showing on third street. If someone catches an Ace and you don't improve to two pair or trips you may have to throw your hand away. You do not want to be chasing half the pot. This is a big leak in many players' game.

[Wake up CALL]

The game you described is a tight players fantasy. I'll let others elaborate.

[Andy B]

I'm in NJ right now. Can I play? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Ray's book is a step in the right direction. Bear in mind that it's written for a game with a qualifier and no declaration round, so you should modify your starting (and continuing) requirements. A good three-card Nine can be playable, and high pairs aren't worth that much, especially if you have a big card showing. A lot of your edge (my edge, anyway) comes from the declaration round, so if you can really sell your hand one way, you may be able to walk off with half of the pot uncontested whether you have a hand or not. Yum.

So you give up information if you raise early. So what? If they're going to call, let 'em. If you're raising to thin the field, umm, don't. Raise for value or deception only.

If you ever want to post hands, post them in the stud section.

[scrub]

Hey, thanks a lot guys. With the end of summer rapidly approaching, the game will probably be starting up again. I'll be sure to post some hands--I feel like if I can learn how to play it right, my earn ought to be a lot higher than playing Hold 'Em for slightly higher stakes in AC. Plus, no drive....

[bugstud]

I find that jamming these games on early streets helps with andy's recommendation, if they're not used to it.

[Phat Mack]

I like Walter's comments; a good explanation in a nutshell. I would probably play any three to an eight that were suited or could make a straight. I think rolled-up middle cards are playable because the hand can be disguised. Rolled up high cards (except A's) can be dangerous because of their lack of the stealth factor; I would play them carefully, depending on the other player's boards. Also, if you are playing with a betting round after the declare, they can leave you with some tough decisions if they are challanged by knowledgeble players.

Aggressive play on the end is a matter of knowing which cards your opponents need to make their hands, and whether they are dead or alive, and knowing which way they will declare. Good card readers don't need a hand if they can determine that they will be the only ones declaring in a certain direction, which is another reason to play hands with deceptive apearances: they prevent your opponents from stealing from you.

You might look for Albert Morehead's book in a used book store. It has a good section on declare. Sklansky's section on high-lo split in Super System is also quite good and has a few pages at the end about the declare game that are very interesting.