4th street percentage?

[TS Clark]

Folks:

I'm just learning to play stud (or at least learning to play it correctly) and am curious if you more experienced hands could advise a newer player on how tight is right.

In hold 'em, you have a VPIP % you can look at if you're a Poker Tracker person. There seem to be some accepted standards for "correct" percentages for that. How about for stud? What percentage of the time should you be seeing 4th street (on average)? I try, per Reese's advice in SS, to only play pretty premium hands, but, like all new players, I'm sure I have some major leaks. I'd like to see where I measure up at the start of hands, however, since I know enough at this point to know that starting hand selection is REALLY key in stud (even more so than hold 'em or Omaha).

Any help, advice, or wisdom would be most appreciated.

Shane Clark

[Andy B]

How often you should see fourth street depends on a lot of factors. If the game is aggressive, you should play fewer hands. If players are very loose on later streets, you might limp in with (63)3 or some such if they are cooperative enough to pay you off when you make open Treys. You might play a three-flush with two of your suit out if the game is very loose, but shouldn't play that hand heads-up unless maybe you have a couple of live over-cards to the other guy's door card.

I don't play on-line much, so I can't give you my numbers. I believe that in my local stud games, which are mostly $3/6 through $6/12, I see fourth street about 25% of the time. When the game is tighter and more aggressive, as seems to be the case with the $6/12 game when it goes lately, it's more like 20%.

You shouldn't be overly worried about trying to skew your percentage to some pre-determined number. You should make each third-street decision on its own merits, which will be influenced by a variety of factors: your hand, the cards that are out, who is holding some of the scarier cards, your position, maybe your table image, your perception of the guy who just raised, etc. If you've folded ten hands in a row, that doesn't necessarily mean you should look for a reason to play the next one, and if you've played four hands in a row, I wouldn't necessarily look for reasons to fold the next one, either.

Reese's section of S/S is very good, but 7CS4AP is better. Get it. If you're in a loose game and you're sticking to mostly "premium" hands, you're probably leaving money on the table.

[TS Clark]

Very helpful post. Thank you.

I'd heard mixed things about the Sklansky book, but I'll pick it up based on your recommendation. I only play at lower limits right now -- is the 7CS4AP text relevant to the kind of games found at low limits or online?

I've really enjoyed playing stud since I took it up. I actually found that I prefer it to hold 'em. So this forum has been a great resource for me, since there seems to be many excellent stud players here. This made me happy since I had three dealers at the Mirage last week tell me stud was a dying game (which they all thought was sad).

Thanks again.

Shane

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]

I'd heard mixed things about the Sklansky book, but I'll pick it up based on your recommendation. I only play at lower limits right now -- is the 7CS4AP text relevant to the kind of games found at low limits or online?


[/ QUOTE ]

Although written with the 15/30 through 30/60 games in mind, it’s relevant to every game. There is also a section on loose games which is very helpful for your typical low-limit games.
The only negative thing you could say about it is that there is so much information in it that you’ll likely have to re-read it several times to get the most out of it. But it’s a great book.

[CarlosChadha]

Hi Shane,

Unfortunately stud is the most complex game to talk about starting hand requirements because strict guidlines with actually hand values are impossible to give when you can see 10 card of the deck in the first round of betting (as upposed to holdem's 2 or omaha's 4). I could probably write you a book about it here in this post, but lucky for me both Ashley Adams and Roy West have written excellent books that address this starting hand requirements for a new player.

And yes...stud is dying...outside of LA, Vegas, atlantic City, or Foxwoods, it is almost impossible to find anything other than 1-5 spread limit (or other similar low limit games). Since few young players are getting interested in stud, the average age of the players in the places where it actually is spread at middle limits seems to be pushing 50...which means that soon the regulars will be literally dying along with the game;-)

Regards,
Carlos

[TS Clark]

[ QUOTE ]
And yes...stud is dying...outside of LA, Vegas, atlantic City, or Foxwoods, it is almost impossible to find anything other than 1-5 spread limit (or other similar low limit games). Since few young players are getting interested in stud, the average age of the players in the places where it actually is spread at middle limits seems to be pushing 50...which means that soon the regulars will be literally dying along with the game;-)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your observation is definitely correct. I played three times last week in a stud game at the Mirage and, with few exceptions, almost every person at the tables I sat at was over 50 (and most were 60 or above). It was pretty weird to look at the age distribution at those stud tables, compared to the comparably limited hold 'em tables.

Well, I think things tend to go in cycles. We'll likely see stud make a resurgence one of these days. I hope so -- it's a very fun, very strategic game.

Shane

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
The only negative thing you could say about it is that there is so much information in it that you’ll likely have to re-read it several times to get the most out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
How is this a bad thing?

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
We'll likely see stud make a resurgence one of these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt it. My local room in particular promotes Texas hold'em to the exclusion of all other games. You get more hands in per hour in hold'em than in other games, so other card rooms have an incentive to do the same.

[Andy B]

7CS4AP was written by three guys. Some folks call it the Sklansky book. Some call it the Zee book. No one ever calls it the Malmuth book, though. Why is that?

I find 7CS4AP highly applicable to my local $3/6 through $6/12 games. These games do have a substantial ante, but really the size of the ante makes somewhat less difference than we make it out to sometimes, I think. If you read it through a few times, get some playing experience, and give it some thought, you should be able to balance their recommendations against the structure of your game(s).

[ QUOTE ]
I actually found that I prefer it to hold 'em.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that most on the stud forum would agree with you.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only negative thing you could say about it is that there is so much information in it that you’ll likely have to re-read it several times to get the most out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
How is this a bad thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

It’s not. But it’s not exactly easy to read either. Could be confusing if you’re new to stud.