Stud Eight or Better Question

[David Sklansky]

I asked some of the best players in the world this question and got surprisingly disparite answers.

The game is 100-200 Eight or Better. Twenty five dollar ante. Twenty five dollar bring in. Expert opponents. Eight handed game.

You are offered the following proposition. You will be dealt the 763 all clubs with the seven as your "upcard". I put that in quotes because your three cards are all faceup (thus the seven upcard means you won't usually be the low card to bring it in). Your last card is facedown if you get that far. Should you take that deal? Please answer one of five ways:

A. It's very very close.

B. It's slightly better to take it

C. It's slightly better to refuse the deal

D. It's more than slightly better to take it.

E. It's more than slightly better to refuse it.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I'll say E. With both my initial hole cards face up, my opponents can play every street but the river perfectly. Couple that with the fact that this hand can easily develop into a chasing hand both ways, I don't want to play it without the initial hole cards hidden.

[togilvie]

e. Refuse the deal.

You're losing value in at least three ways:

1) Reduced implied odds. Your opponents won't pay you off with worse hands when you hit a flush/straight/low. But they'll make you pay through the nose to hit those winners.

2) Bluffing opportunities are significantly reduced, except on the river. Semi-bluffing, obviously, is non-existent.

3) No deceptive value. I've found that hands like this can be most profitable when opponents put you on the wrong side of a hand (e.g. they put you on low when you hit your flush, or vice-versa). With your hand turned up, this can only work for you on the river.

Very interested in how the real experts looked at it.

[Billy LTL]

I'm not a stud8 expert but I'd say:

E. It's much more than slightly better to refuse it

Not many good things can come from everybody knowing your hand on all but the last street. Especially in a split pot game against seven experts in the game.

At best you'd be competing for half the pot the majority of the time (and often not making it), and many times finding yourself jammed between a high pair(s) and a lower low showing on the board. And whenever you paired a "hole card", well, it would get ugly if you were stubborn enough to keep drawing.

[J.A.Sucker]

I'm going out on a limb here and answering, despite never playing Stud 8/B. I say:

E. It's more than slightly better to refuse it.

The value of hands in this game is based on a few ideas, especially against expert opponents:

1. Starting off low and backing into a mediocre hi hand, such as 2 pair.

1a. When you catch babies that pair your hole cards, then they work "double" for you most of the time: you are improving your hi hand in case you bust out on the river, and also you gain deception that you may already have made a lock. Proper raising and pressure will make it difficult for marginal hands to get to the river against you anyway. This is where the expert makes money. Since your hand is exposed, then you lose all deception.

2. Since people know your hand, they will take shots at you. This really makes your hand difficult to play.

3. Your low draw is only to a 7.

4. The A is the most imporant card in the deck, since it allows the most scooping possibilities, which your hand has few.

These are just my opinions, but I'm Just Another Sucker.

[DanZ]

With such a large initial pot, 1.25 big bets, we should be much more inclined to play.

The deceptive value of having your cards down is reduced greatly by having expert opponents. For example, if you caught a painted flush card, and took some heat on 4th, they would know you were either rolled or had a flush draw, which they would assume meant 3 lows to start most of the time. They will often be very good at gueesing which lows pair you and which don't. Also, when you make a monster in 5 or 6, they weren't going to go off for a ton of bets anyway. For example, if you show 3 low flush cards on 5, all but the strongest opponents are going to fold, regardless if they "know" you have it or not.

If you pair on 4th, people will know, but you would still see 5th most of the time, where the play will often become automatic from the boards against you and the card you caught.

Fairly often, everyone else will be dealt junk on 3rd and not want to fight it out. They are going to assume you are raising or reraisng on 3.

I'll say take the hand, and it's not close.

Dan Z.

[Rockfish]

You'll recognize this bit of text.

"Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose."

E.

Rockfish

[Easy E]

Based on my EV potential against 7 expert 7/8 players? E

Based on an expert in my place? B

[Easy E]

Mostly, the FTP applies most successfully against one (maybe two) opponents.

Here, you already are seeing 9:1 pot odds (on the miracle call-only scenario), or 2.25 bets in the pot, with a fairly strong 7/8 hand that has scoop potential. You'll often be raising this hand to put additional pressure on even if the cards are exposed (or will you? I'm gray there...)

Instinctively (because I'm not doing the math), this situation seems +EV even AGAINST the experts, if you also play expertly, because of the pot equity/hand strength that you already have (even though you'll lose some because they know your hand, I don't "feel" that you'd lose it all).

This requires, however, that:
a) you can get away cheaply on 3rd
b) you play really well on future streets.

I await the chastizing....

[ben mo]

D. It's more than slightly better to take it.

I think people are being very unreasonable in their answers here, and are thinking more along the lines of whether you should CALL A BET on 3rd street if you're in this situation. The question asked whether you would TAKE THE HAND.

The only way you would ever have to voluntarily put money into the pot with this hand is if you're the bring-in. If you're the bring-in with the 7, it's likely you have the inside track on the low already, as well as the ability to back into a high, so I can't believe that the forced bet of $25 can really be very negative e.v., if at all.

On the other hand, every hand where you're NOT the bring-in, you'll be able to pick and choose your situations for free: for example, you could play ONLY when your cards are totally live, and you seem to be up against only one player who is starting out low versus many who are going high. Or, you could steal the antes by raising the bring-in when you're last to act and the bringin is a 6.

In order to say that this is not profitable, you'd have to say that the profitability of all the free hands you would be getting is lower than the negative e.v. of the hands where you are the bring-in, and I just can't see this.*


* One caveat: This would vary depending on how good of a player you are. I'm thinking of it from whether I would be able to squeak out ANY positive e.v., no matter how small, while an expert player who has a good positive e.v. against the other players should obviously take the hand only if it is more profitable to him than a random hand already is.

ben