Howard Lederer - TD 2-7 articles

[Luv2DriveTT]

A great article by Howard Lederer on a TD 2-7 hand he played, and his thought process behind it.

here are the two links to the two articles. The second one is quite thought provoking... I need to study it a bit more before I comment.

LINK 1 LINK 2

PS: He should have stayed pat with the 9... and raised that mofo!

A Simple Deuce to Seven Hand

I played a 2-7 hand recently. I think it shows some of the tricky situations that can come up in this game.
500-1000 limit six handed. 300,500 blinds, fold, fold to me. I have 2-3-3-5-Q and open for 1000. The button makes it 1500 and the small blind calls. I call. Small blind draws 2 and I draw 2, button stands pat. The button is a loose, aggressive, and creative player. He is also losing in the game. This means he could have a lot of different hands; anything from a pat 7 to a complete snow.

SB checks, I check blind and the button bets. SB calls and I hit a 7-K and call. I am now drawing at, 2-3-5-7. SB draws 1, I draw 1 and button stands pat. Check, check, button bets. Call, and I hit a 9 and call. SB draws 1 and I break the 9 and draw, button stands. Check from the SB and I hit a pair of 3's and check. The button bets and the SB folds. I call. He shows me a 5-6-7-8-J and wins the pot.

To some, it might appear that I played this hand poorly. I actually only have doubts about one of my decisions. Try and think about what I could have done differently, and why I played the hand like I did.

After I hit the 7, I have two draws at a wheel, and I'm in three way pot. If I had check raised after the first draw I might have gotten the button to fold. He would have been in a very tough spot with the hand he had.

After I called and hit the 9, I have no regret about breaking it. For me to win the pot after standing on the 9, a number of things would have to fall perfect. First, the button would have to not have me beat. Though this was quite possible, he is much more likely than not to have an 8 or better. Then, the SB would have to miss. And, finally, the button would then have to miss after drawing to beat my hand. If I call and stand pat, I am practically turning my hand over, so he will draw to beat me if I am not already beaten. I felt that this parlay was much less likely than just hitting a 4,6 or 8. The 8 might not win but the 4 or 6 should win. I can also hit a 9 which will give me the same hand back.

A very important point when considering whether to break the 9 is that a good percentage of the time my 9 is good, he is on a complete snow. This means I can hit almost anything and win when I call his bluff on the end.

Now let's look at the call on the river. A fold would have been a terrible play. I am getting 10.5-1 that he is snowing. Against this player, I would have been willing to take 5 or 6 to 1. I don't think a raise on the river was an option, as this would be a very suspicious play. If I had made my hand, I certainly would bet out, as the button is quite likely to show down his pat hand.

An interesting question is whether the button's bet on the river is good or not. There is no chance he will bluff the pot with the worst hand here. But, there is a good chance he might get paid off. So, he is risking a bet against an 8,9,10 or better J, while he gets paid off by a Q, K, A or baby pair. For a simple hand, there were many close decisions. I always come away from a 2-7 triple draw session with a lot of food for thought.

[timprov]

I probably donkbet the 9 if I really think the button has a bad hand. I think the idea that the button is going to draw to beat him is misplaced; most of the time he won't be able to call the bet. This case is a good illustration, and he's not even truly snowing. There's no way button can call and draw to 8765 here.

If button is capable of raising his J, it's a little more difficult, but I still think betting out is right.

This is a great illustration of why the always bet a card ahead/always check a card behind strategy is flawed. A donkbet is clearly superior to a checkraise here. If Howard hadn't gone ahead and checked before looking at his card, he might have figured that out. Similarly, button probably shouldn't have bet the third round. He's unlikely to be an equity favorite, and neither 1-card draw is folding.

[Luv2DriveTT]

against a good thinking player, the donk bet is clearly superior. But against a LAG (as this opponent seems to be) the check raise may be the superior move. Too often I have experienced a raise from a LAG in this situation hoping to get me to fold a clearly superior hand... of course the reactions of opponents may change considerably in the 500/1k limits, but from my experience watching to 300/600 games at UB the LAGs tend to not back down.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[timprov]

[ QUOTE ]
against a good thinking player, the donk bet is clearly superior. But against a LAG (as this opponent seems to be) the check raise may be the superior move. Too often I have experienced a raise from a LAG in this situation hoping to get me to fold a clearly superior hand... of course the reactions of opponents may change considerably in the 500/1k limits, but from my experience watching to 300/600 games at UB the LAGs tend to not back down.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

The third player in the hand makes the donkbet obvious still, presuming he'll fold to two cold if he didn't improve. You just need to have the guts to stay with your nine anyway. Headsup check-calling or check-raising are both options, but I don't think breaking the hand is. If he's truly a LAG he might 3-bet a worse hand, so I'm not thrilled with a checkraise.

[randomstumbl]

I think the donkbet looks better when you already know what the cards are, I'm not sure it's so great most of the time.

If the button has a better hand, you're getting 3 big bets in dead (assuming you're not respecting the LAG's bets).

If he has a complete snow, you're losing very little by breaking and probably winning two BB (turn and river).

The only time the donkbet is really better is when he has a hand like jack high. You're a dog to draw out on it and ahead now. You're losing a lot by breaking.

So, I guess it depends on the size of the pot and the percent of the time the button has a worse 9, t, j or q.

Tangentally, what type of hands would you donkbet in this situation? I think it screams I have a nine or seven, guess which one it is. A thinking player is often going to raise (especially with breakable pat hands). I think the donkbet is certainly useful, but can give out a lot of information if misused.

[timprov]

If you're ahead, checking and calling is a disaster, especially if if keeps the SB in where otherwise he might have folded. If you're behind, betting is a minor error, especially if, like Howard, you're going to call on the end regardless of what you catch. I think you have to be very convinced you're behind here to draw.

[randomstumbl]

I read these when I first started playing and must say the second one makes a lot more sense after playing awhile.

The OOP player is going to need a big hand to checkraise into two solid pat players. The 86 is an easy fold against good/solid players (though it's a tough fold against some LAGs I've played against).

The math is illuminating on how easy of a call it is for the 764 though. I'd probably think about raising and then calling down. I think Lederer does a really great job of showing how big of a hole I have in my game. The math is something that I probably wouldn't have thought through on my own, but is really understandable and enlighting.

If he ever puts out a book with a similar style, I'm sure I'll pick it up.