Skill as a Component of Stud - A Question

[OldYoda]

I am a frequent lurker here and have been a hold em player on a number of sites for the last 2 1/2 years. I am increasingly tired of the pure luck involved in the hold em game. My question - does skill play a greater role in being a winning player in stud than it does in hold em?

[Andy B]

I like to think so. That said, hold'em is hardly a game of "pure luck." It is a very complex and subtle game. Suckouts are actually more frequent in stud. On the other hand, the better player also gets to do his share of sucking out, so that makes the game more palatable for me.

[jayheaps]

it depends on the level and how many players are seeing the flop. In the short-term, I actually think luck plays a bigger role, but i think a skilled stud player has a bigger edge.

Here's an example. In holdem, pocket aces are around a 60% favorite against 2 random hands. In stud, split aces are around 45% agains 2 random hands.

[Andy B]

Pocket Aces is undeniably the best starting hand in hold'em. Split Aces is far from the best starting hand in stud. But you are correct that stud hands tend to be closer in value than hold'em hands.

[perfecto]

You need to adjust your attitude and/or your knowledge of poker in general if you believe that pure luck is a deciding factor over the long term for any form of poker.

It's not. Doesn't matter if it's stud, hold'em, or omaha.

Remember, luck comes in two flavors. Neither of them makes a difference in the long run.

[nate1729]

Good stud players often have a bigger edge than skilled hold'em players have. Note that high-limit stud is played with a large ante to reduce the skill factor a little. (Read Malmuth's ~Poker Essays~ for discussions of stuff like this.) Now, it's probably true that at low limits, skilled hold'em players have a bigger edge these days, because most of the I-saw-it-on-TV clowns go to hold'em, but who knows. My winrates are better at hold'em, and I'm not sure which game I'm better at.

But all that is, in a sense, irrelevant. It sounds like your psychological game needs an overhaul. And certainly don't play stud if you can't stand it when the hand in front doesn't hold up.

Good luck.

[MRBAA]

At low stakes, good stud players have more edge, IMHO. The simple reason: more info available tothe alert player in the form of dead cards and the boards of opponents. BUT there is a major caveat: This is only true if the opponents are equally bad. And right now, Hold'em is the game of choice for new players, so many more fish in a "typical" he game than an typical stud game.

[Snoogins47]

[ QUOTE ]
At low stakes, good stud players have more edge, IMHO. The simple reason: more info available tothe alert player in the form of dead cards and the boards of opponents. BUT there is a major caveat: This is only true if the opponents are equally bad. And right now, Hold'em is the game of choice for new players, so many more fish in a "typical" he game than an typical stud game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aye, but have you seen a low limit stud game? There may be slightly less fish, but the fish tend to be considerably worse.

[jayheaps]

[ QUOTE ]
Pocket Aces is undeniably the best starting hand in hold'em. Split Aces is far from the best starting hand in stud. But you are correct that stud hands tend to be closer in value than hold'em hands.

[/ QUOTE ]


Completely agree, I was just trying to make a point.

[SittingBull]

are imitating what they see on TV. I sample a taste of how some were playing in the 4/8 game the other night in Biloxi,Miss.
It certainly was a sweet game. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
Happy pokering, [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
SittingBull