books on stud

[Andy B]

Just stud high, although I reserve the right to throw in a couple of observations about stud/8. I don't think I have all that much to contribute to the literature for the other games.

[TheShootah]

I think the world could use an all in one tome on how to beat all the Stud games. I am sure Felicia and I could put together a kick ass Razz section, although that could seriously affect book sales. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Just stud high, although I reserve the right to throw in a couple of observations about stud/8. I don't think I have all that much to contribute to the literature for the other games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy I envision "Small Stakes Stud" written by you with a blue cover (oh yeah baby, I said 'envision') in the near future, write my friend, study and write!

(kudos for only covering Stud high, since there will be alot of info to digest re: low fixed limit and spread already)

I look forward to a thankyou on the acknowledgements page when it goes to print. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[greatwhite]

There should be a book like that for all the games, razz, stud, stud/8, the omahas, and no limit hold'em. [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[frappeboy]

Read both 7 card stud for advanced players and 42 Lessons how to win at medium & low limits. Paul Kammen's book is absolutely useless he is definitely an amateur player and the book is terribly boring. Ashley Adam's book is a little better but still not worth reading. Definitely read Sklansky's and Roy West's books though they are the 2 best books on stud high PERIOD.

[Andy B]

Chip Reese's section in the original Super/System is a damnsight better than West's book. There is just so much that Roy doesn't have quite right that I can't recommend his book.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Chip Reese's section in the original Super/System is a damnsight better than West's book. There is just so much that Roy doesn't have quite right that I can't recommend his book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy I've read Chip's section in SS1 and am now halfway through West's book and I thought West gave very good advice, especially regarding live cards and so forth.

If off the top of your head anytime in the future you'd like to give an example of what West has wrong I'd be very eager to know.

Many Thanks,
SDM

[Andy B]

Off the top of my head, he suggests that if you have pocket Kings and an Ace raises you, you should call on third street but fold fourth if you don't make trips. If your Kings are completely live, it is 20:1 against your making trips on fourth street, and you're not getting anything like 20:1. Now when an Ace raises, you might call, you might fold, and you might re-raise, but if you see fourth street, you shouldn't fold unless someone gives you a good reason to. I found a lot of things I didn't like when I read West's book for the first time a little less than a year ago.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Off the top of my head, he suggests that if you have pocket Kings and an Ace raises you, you should call on third street but fold fourth if you don't make trips. If your Kings are completely live, it is 20:1 against your making trips on fourth street, and you're not getting anything like 20:1. Now when an Ace raises, you might call, you might fold, and you might re-raise, but if you see fourth street, you shouldn't fold unless someone gives you a good reason to. I found a lot of things I didn't like when I read West's book for the first time a little less than a year ago.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, Andy, I read this post and I scratch my head. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Obviously you are a very good player and knowledgable about the game, and have the ability to indeed write about it one day, and your post above highlights the fact that you know alot about the game ... respect.

But to me (a beginning Stud player) in that situation, West's advice is spot on: take a card off on the cheap street (especially if your kings are hidden) and if you don't trip up (knowing your opponent has Aces) you should fold.

West says in one part of his book (first 100 pages) that you shouldn't take a lesser pair against a high pair because one of three things could happen and two of them are bad for you:

1) You both don't improve opponent wins
2) You both improve (equally) opponent wins
3) You improve but he doesn't you win

To me, that's sound advice.

West does say in one part that you can play but you must realize you are "running uphill" (as he calls it) and in the longterm this isn't how to pay your rent.

AndyB, if I'm mistaken and you have the time between folding junk hands online and wish to reply, I'd appreciate it, and furthermore please note that I do consider myself a beginner and am not 'defending' West's book per se, but it seems like West gives very steady advice ... although I know you do too.

Thus, I'm confused. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Cheers,
SDM

[Andy B]

If you call on third street but fold on fourth street when you don't make trips, you will be folding on fourth street 95% of the time. You will have put in a bet in each of those hands, and you're not going to win enough in the 5% of the hands where you do trip up to make up for the bets you threw away the other 95% of the time. You won't even come close. I am not saying that it is wrong to call an Ace with pocket Kings. Sometimes it is correct to call, sometimes it is correct to fold, and sometimes it is correct to raise. What I am saying is that West's gameplan in this particular scenario is badly, badly flawed, and that this isn't the only such case in this book. If you need more examples I might be able to accommodate you.

Don't worry. I'm not playing on-line. Apart from my suckout-fest a couple of weeks ago, I haven't been playing on-line at all lately, and I don't anticipate doing so again very soon.