books on stud

[TheShootah]

See, the logic here is wrong. If you take off a card on 3rd trying to hit trips, you have some pot odds we will call 1 to n. On 4th, folding makes absolutely no sense unless he pairs Aces now, since on 4th, you will have odds of 1 to n+3, making the call even more correct on 4th than on 3rd! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi AndyB,

First off let me say thanks, highly appreciated. (my online 'folding' comment was because I normally play online while surfing 2+2 and since I only enter with quality + live cards I'm doing a lot of folding) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I understand what you are saying completely if the scenario is split kings because yes, that opponent with Aces if they are a good player will probably fold if you pair your door card King. (I'm assuming)

With Kings in the hole, West's advice has to be right to be right to not only take off fourth street, but if your kings are live to perhaps take it to the river? (I don't know about this one myself, it still seems like an 'uphill' battle to me and personally in fixed limit I could probably check and call it, in PL ... forget it!)

If my logic is flawed (probably is) and you have the time whenever you're not writing your book ( [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ) and wish to point out mistakes in West's book, I'll be very glad to listen.

Cheers,
SDM

[Andy B]

The problem is that West does not advocate seeing the river with pocket Kings against a raiser with an Ace. This would be defensible. He has the reader fold on fourth over 95% of the time. If you're going to fold fourth, you should fold third.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that West does not advocate seeing the river with pocket Kings against a raiser with an Ace. This would be defensible. He has the reader fold on fourth over 95% of the time. If you're going to fold fourth, you should fold third.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

[pokermanny]

i bet there's money to be made in a 'convert your hold 'em skills to 7stud' kind of book. (not that i want it made since i like the hold 'em players that play 7stud and bet a pair of aces on 7th like a maniac)

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
i bet there's money to be made in a 'convert your hold 'em skills to 7stud' kind of book. (not that i want it made since i like the hold 'em players that play 7stud and bet a pair of aces on 7th like a maniac)

[/ QUOTE ]

You’re saying I’m a maniac? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
i bet there's money to be made in a 'convert your hold 'em skills to 7stud' kind of book. (not that i want it made since i like the hold 'em players that play 7stud and bet a pair of aces on 7th like a maniac)

[/ QUOTE ]


This is probably true. LHE players that see AKJr and think they have a monster can get in serious trouble.