Violating a Cardinal Rule (Stud High) - Page 2

jon_1van · #11 10-25-2005, 10:08 AM

I haven't read any responses.

In general this call is bad and you know it.

However, if ever you can make this play, it will be when you are shorthanded. Espically if you've been raising with the highest upcard all of the time, because the 3rd street call doesn't have to be a "real" hand.

So even though I don't like the 4th street call I think your play on 5th-7th is good. Your 4th street call was strong enough that you probably wouldn't get any action from something like JJ77 had you led out on 5th.

So I think checking 5th allowed you to get action from many more hands.

Jeffage · #12 10-25-2005, 10:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
In general this call is bad and you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I don't know this. This game is three handed and I'm pretty certain I would have been reraised by a pair of 7's on 3rd street. This is a loose player and he is very likely to have just sevens here (imo). Full game is a different story if he calls after a couple callers, etc. This was a tenacious caller and he was aggro. I seriously doubt it doesn't go to 60 on 3rd if he has sevens.

Jeff

jon_1van · #13 10-25-2005, 10:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
My opponent is not good. But if he only has sevens, he will fold them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't an example of him being bad is it.

How could he continue on 5th if all he has is 77 and QQ bets into him after breaking the "cardinal rule" on 4th (ie indicating at least a pocket pair).

CarlosChadha · #14 10-25-2005, 10:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
My opponent is not good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was this me?

[ QUOTE ]
But if he only has sevens, he will fold them. I think this is much more likely than him having trips. So I give him a card to catchup or maybe make him think I only have queens so he gives himself an excuse to draw out. Also, it is possible that he could fold two pair to a 5th street bet since I've clearly rep'd at least one pair before that. But when I check 5th, he may think that his two pair is poss good and call all the way. I don't know, I like checking here but I could see it both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he is good enough to fold 2 pair to a bet on 5th, he is probably good enough not to fall for such an obvious slow play by calling on 6th and the river (without having you beat). The one good thing I can see about this play is that he might think his 2 pair is good on 5th when you check, inducing him to bet once. But if you call or CR he knows he is behind and will probably shut down.

If he only has 7s, then his "catching up" very well means hitting a flush or str8 draw, which you don't want. He might catch up by catching a 2nd pair on 6th and not call you anyway.

-Carlos

jon_1van · #15 10-25-2005, 10:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In general this call is bad and you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I don't know this. This game is three handed and I'm pretty certain I would have been reraised by a pair of 7's on 3rd street. This is a loose player and he is very likely to have just sevens here (imo). Full game is a different story if he calls after a couple callers, etc. This was a tenacious caller and he was aggro. I seriously doubt it doesn't go to 60 on 3rd if he has sevens.

Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

Really, I wouldn't always put in the raise there with split 7s. The likelyhood that I'd put in a raise with 77 would depend a whole lot more on the flow of the game then the cards I have. If I hadn't raised much lately, I could throw in a raise with or without the pair. If I've been aggressive lately maybe now is time to go into check-call mode.

Anyway, the reason I think the call is bad is because I don't think you can be that far ahead. When he calls the completion he very well could have::
- a pocket pair (you are behind 2 pair)
- an A or K (you are slightly ahead of 77A)
- a 3 flush (you are slightly ahead of pair + 3 flush)
- trip 7s (you are getting crushed)

Because I find it hard to imagine a scenario where you are really extracting a bunch of equity (lets face it, highpair vs small pair with 3 cards to come isn't a HUGE edge)I don't like this call. But it will be alot closer than had this been a ring game....very true.

BeerMoney · #16 10-25-2005, 10:29 AM

Jeff, what was the cardinal rule that was violated? Calling fourth, or checking 5th?

I think checking 5th is a mistake as once you called on fourth he knows you have the queens. If he's got two pair, he folds to your bet. That's not a great option, but better than giving a free card. If he's got trips he calls.

I think the results of this hand are somewhat meaningless.

jon_1van · #17 10-25-2005, 10:32 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If he only has 7s, then his "catching up" very well means hitting a flush or str8 draw, which you don't want. He might catch up by catching a 2nd pair on 6th and not call you anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think Jeff should worry about this too much once he hits trips. All his cards are live. So even if the opponent hits a straight or flush Jeff will be redrawing say..30-40% of the time.

If we decide to check we'd forego a small fraction of a bet when the opponent has something like 56 in the hole (because he would have called) But I don't think this is nearly as important as trying to induce calls from 2 pairs.

BeerMoney · #18 10-25-2005, 10:43 AM

Jon, you're making stuff up.

jon_1van · #19 10-25-2005, 10:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Jon, you're making stuff up.

[/ QUOTE ]

?? what?

CarlosChadha · #20 10-25-2005, 12:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In general this call is bad and you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I don't know this. This game is three handed and I'm pretty certain I would have been reraised by a pair of 7's on 3rd street. This is a loose player and he is very likely to have just sevens here (imo). Full game is a different story if he calls after a couple callers, etc. This was a tenacious caller and he was aggro. I seriously doubt it doesn't go to 60 on 3rd if he has sevens.

Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

Really, I wouldn't always put in the raise there with split 7s. The likelyhood that I'd put in a raise with 77 would depend a whole lot more on the flow of the game then the cards I have. If I hadn't raised much lately, I could throw in a raise with or without the pair. If I've been aggressive lately maybe now is time to go into check-call mode.

Anyway, the reason I think the call is bad is because I don't think you can be that far ahead. When he calls the completion he very well could have::
- a pocket pair (you are behind 2 pair)
- an A or K (you are slightly ahead of 77A)
- a 3 flush (you are slightly ahead of pair + 3 flush)
- trip 7s (you are getting crushed)

Because I find it hard to imagine a scenario where you are really extracting a bunch of equity (lets face it, highpair vs small pair with 3 cards to come isn't a HUGE edge)I don't like this call. But it will be alot closer than had this been a ring game....very true.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are almost NEVER "extracting a bunch of equity" in a short handed stud game. The name of the game is small edges. Shorthanded, average players will reraise a majority (60-75%) of the time with the split 7s on 3rd in the BI. from the bringin. This is why this is a fine call on 4th. In a full game, it is much more likely that a caller (but less so the BI) has a split pair with their doorcard. You also didn't indclude the possibility of a 3 str8 as one of the starting hands.

Your comment on the flow of the game is very true, and is an extremely important factor.

-Carlos