|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/29/2008 9:44:43 PM PACIFIC |
 Stud Hand at The Bellagio, 4 POKER, 10. Aug 2003 10:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I observed a hand the other night at the Bellagio, $40-80 seven card stud. A player (presumed to be a "strong/solid player") raises in an unopened pot in late position with split Jacks/seven kicker. (The way the hand was played out, it was definitely not pocket jacks.....anyway), the bring in just calls with a 3 door card. (he holds pocket Aces). On the turn, the split Jacks catches a seven, now giving him two pair on fourth street. The bring in catches a five to go along with his three door. The Jacks up hand bets, gets raised, he re-raises it, gets raised back and now the pocket Aces just calls. That's five bets going in on the turn here. Now, (and this is what I don't quite understand by the good players actions). On fifth street the Jacks up hits a blank, and the pocket Aces hits a duece, for a board read of 3-5-2, all offsuit. NOW, the Jacks up hand decides to just check and call here. My thoughts were, if he was willing to put in five bets, while getting in the last raise I may add.....why would he now just check it? What hand could he possibly give the bring-in on fifth street that he didn't give him credit for on fourth street? Did he think he made a low straight? IMO, there's no way he should give this player (pretty tight player as well) a made hand here if he didn't give him a set on fourth street. If he thought his hand was that good on fourth, which he obviously did by all his re-raising.....why would he now back off? It's like after he made all those raises, he now decides to give this guy trips, but that thought never even crossed his mind on fourth street when the bring- in got extremely aggresive as well. On sixth street, the Jacks up hand caught another blank and the pocket Aces caught the third Ace, putting him way in the lead now. Jacks up checked it again, (which was ok, given that this guy caught a scare card Ace)....the trip Aces bet again, (obviously), and was called. River......trip Aces "smoke bets"....Jacks up catches the third Jack for a full house and raises. The trip Aces squeezes his cards.....no improvement, and just calls. IMO, the player who held jacks up played his hand poorly, and not because he put in 5 bets on fourth street, but because he simply just check-called on fifth when his check was unwarranted if he really thought his Jacks up was good enough on fourth. If it were stud 8 or better, I'd say yeah...when your opponent shows 3-5-2, you better know to back off with jacks up after multiple raises, but not in stud high. I was wondering, what hand did he put him on to begin with after all those raises? A high pocket pair? Two smaller pair? Well *both* of those holdings he has beat at this point. And he neglected to put him on trips, obviously....so why no more betting now on fifth? Keep in mind, the player who held Jacks up is considered to be a very strong player.. ............While the other player is conservative,(not a pro or anything), but plays well. Thoughts?.............seasoned stud players? 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, Schuster, 10. Aug 2003 11:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm not a stud expert, but if the jacks put the other guy on pocket aces, then hitting the 5 gave the aces 4 extra outs to a better hand. I think pocket aces would be a reasonable read there as well given the action. The aces then has 15 outs (18 if the next card is a live blank) to aces up or better with 2 cards to come, and the jacks is only about 5 to 1 to fill by the river. That puts the aces as a slight favorite to win the hand if I'm not mistaken. Had the aces caught a total blank, he'd only have 11 outs to aces up or trips with 2 cards to come since the wheel draw wouldn't be there. Anyway, I'm not a stud expert at all, but that's the best I can make of it. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, stdioh, 11. Aug 2003 09:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Damn...I just replied to this and said essentially the exact same thing you did. I just assumed that nobody here cared enough about stud to analyse everything there. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, Schuster, 11. Aug 2003 10:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Bah. I'm not a great stud player, but I'm working on it, so I love when people post a hand here. If I played more often, I'd probably have a few of my own. Your post did remind me of something that I've been meaning to get a handle on. Why do stud players bet in the dark on 7th? Like you said, if the AAA had looked at his river card and then bet, the right play would just be to call. It cost him an extra bet because he didn't check it. What's the deal? Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, stdioh, 11. Aug 2003 10:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I don't know. I think that there is really no point in doing it, since you are giving away information to your opponent (that information being that your 7th card is a random card). I guess that you could do it when you're on a made monster to try to extract an extra bet or you could do it on a bluff to show that you have a monster and try to fold off your opponent, but really I think there is no value to it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 08:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 11. Aug 2003 10:39 Schuster wrote: > Bah. I'm not a great stud player, but I'm working on it, so I love when people post a hand > here. If I played more often, I'd probably have a few of my own. Your post did remind me of > something that I've been meaning to get a handle on. Why do stud players bet in the dark on > 7th? Like you said, if the AAA had looked at his river card and then bet, the right play would > just be to call. It cost him an extra bet because he didn't check it. What's the deal? > > Lee nah you almost have to raise and call 3 bets there with J's full. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, Allyc, 10. Aug 2003 12:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wasn't it the jacks up that just called on 4th after the reraising? Wouldn't jacks up be expecting the bringin to play back with a medium pair maybe, defending against a possible steal? When the bringin reraised jacks up reraise, jacks up now has to give the bringin credit for having a real hand. Aces in the hole is a real possibility now, and with 3 5 2 on board, jacks up may expect a raise if he bets on 5th. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, 4 POKER, 12. Aug 2003 06:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good thinking allyc. Yes, It was the jacks up hand that got in the last raise on the turn. Anyway....it was a pretty interesting hand and as Shuster pointed out as well, the two Aces actually did have alot of outs to improve. Thanks for the responses. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 08:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Aug 2003 12:25 Allyc wrote: > Wasn't it the jacks up that just called on 4th after the reraising? > Wouldn't jacks up be expecting the bringin to play back with a medium pair maybe, > defending against a possible steal? > When the bringin reraised jacks up reraise, jacks up now has to give the bringin > credit for having a real hand. > Aces in the hole is a real possibility now, and with 3 5 2 on board, jacks up may > expect a raise if he bets on 5th. with suits yes with just a low gutter no. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio WTF?, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 08:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| 7's rolled is a totally different hand. but the moves I described were similarly motivated. good play barry. SHEESH !! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| That was me! But..., Barry T, 10. Aug 2003 19:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi, 4:. Thanks for watching were (were you in the game?). Stud is not my best game and I welcome comments, but we need to get the facts straight before asking for opinons of real stud players. First off, my door card was a seven, not a jack. And in fact, the hole cards were also sevens. That is correct, I was rolled up. That might make a difference in your analysis. I went five bets on fourth street when a jack came (I had the nuts). I know it looks like jacks up, but I really had 777J. It was clear he had aces (but even if he is rolled up, I am ahead I thought if he was rolled up, he would wait for fifth street, a more traditional street of decloak). On fifth street, I decided I could afford to check raise him, so I checked. I was pretty certain that this guy would always bet his aces, Since I can choose to check raise on either fifth or sixth most of the time, I thought showing "respect" on fifth would allow me to check-raise on sixth unless a terrible card came. Terrible cards were a four or an ace. An ace did come, so now I was behind, making me happy I played the way I did. I called when he led. I caught a jack on the river (making you think I had started with two pair) , thus filling me up. He bet blind, and I had to decide whether to raise or call. I decided to raise, since the odds were good he did not fill up, and he would tell me if he did. He called my raise. I thought I played it OK, but I would love to hear from others. Do I still deserve to called strong/solid (thanks!)? I gave the hand a lot of thought, and I felt I gave it a good play. BarryT (By the way 4, if you are watching me, please introduce yourself. I would like to meet you.) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: That was me! But..., 4 POKER, 10. Aug 2003 20:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Barry, The two hands may sound similar but I don't think this was you in this game because A, the player *did* have a jack door card, and B, the other player caught his Ace on sixth street, not on fifth. The player with the Jack door card checked on fifth street and just called the player who now hit a 2. If that player was rolled up sevens (which he couldn't have been with a J door), but even if that was the case, he still would have check-raised it there on fifth, in my opinion anyway. But I think it's funny that you held a similar hand to the one in which I observed! Your hand was played correct by the way you're discussing it, but I wanted to just respond and tell you that these two hands were different. I remember it because I have I have an uncanny (maybe strange) memory for remembering alot of poker hands from beginning to end even if the hand was not played by me! Sounds odd but that is one area where my memory is pretty darn good! (can't say that about everything else ,but)! Anyway, the next time I'm at the B, I will ask a floorman who you are and introduce myself for sure. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: That was me! But..., Barry T, 10. Aug 2003 20:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi. My guy caught his ace on 6th street too. I decided to check-raise on sixth, instead of fifth, since I could see if he improved to beat me. which he did. Also, I felt that rasing on sixth instead of fifth would tie him into the river, but when the ace came on sixth, I ummm..changed my mind. I just made the crying call when he led. Yes, all of the floor guys know me, as I am there 5 nights a week. If I turn out to be the guy you watched, maybe you will realize that just this once, you got the door card wrong (or maybe when you walked over, the dealer had pitched fourth street below the door card). It seems too much of a coincidence, since my guys cards were also 352A. BarryT | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: That was me! But..., 4 POKER, 11. Aug 2003 03:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hey Barry, Well maybe it was you! But seriously, I don't think it was because you had mentioned that stud was not your main/best game correct?.....While this particular player was only a (pro) stud player. (player with door card J, seat #1....player with pocket Aces (bring-in, seat #3). Still ring a bell? (And believe me Barry I am wrong quite often (LOL)....but not when it comes to remembering cards, street for street! I know, pretty sick huh)?! But it has helped me tremendously with my poker, especially in my stud games. Anyway, I've played with him before in California....and he's an excellent stud player, and that's why I was surprised of his play with this hand. But I can guarantee you Barry....this guys door card was indeed a Jack,(I was observing the game closely before the hand was even dealt out)...... and that was the reason that I thought he would still continue the betting on fifth street because to go for a check-raise in that spot would be a less correct play IMHO. Even if the other player held pocket Aces, with 5 bets going in the turn, he may very well have checked it along in that spot also, and personally, I think it would be more correct here to just follow through with the betting because the card that the other player caught on fifth should not have been a card that would keep him from betting, and even though he did hold Jacks up, the hand was still vulnerable, yet still the favorite at that time and the bet should of went in there on fifth. But that's just MO. I wouldn't have given the free card possibilty in that spot if I honestly felt that my two pair was indeed the best there. The other player still must connect with 2 Aces, and 2 of his "live cards" actually fell on the player with the Jacks up. (board of J-7-5-2, in that order). Now on sixth street, his check call holds more merit due to the fact that he now caught the Ace. The only street I thought he played his hand a little "off" was on fifth, but nonetheless, every street should be considered here. Not a huge mistake though, just a little weak IMO. ************************************************************************************ Now............ back to your hand for a moment......You had mentioned that you were looking to check-raise on 6th correct? When you were analyzing the possible holdings of this player....were pocket Aces the one and only hand you put him on here?(you had said in your first post that it was clear that he had Aces, but he could've also had KK or QQ or two pair and played it the same way after you got aggresive after hitting the Jack, no?). Whether he holds AA, KK, QQ, all three of those hands need to improve to two pair, yet all three of them can still beat one pair of jacks. So it really shouldn't change his thought process when putting in all those raises on the turn because if he gave you one pair of Jacks, (and obviously that's what he gave you here), he would be just as aggresive with all of those holdings. It doesn't matter if it's AA or KK, he's still going to be aggresive. I'm asking all that because at that point (6th street)....pocket Aces would probably (and I say Probably) be the *only* hand that could beat you here, unless of course he held a 4 in the pocket but being the way the hand was played out, I'd be less likely to put him on holding a 4 and would've chose to still be aggresive with my hand if I held rolled up 7's. I think he still could've held 2 pair on the turn with also the possibilty of KK or QQ, as well (burried). But if that's the hand that you gave him credit for, then yes, I can understand your check on fifth while looking to play it heavier now on 6th until the Ace fell on his board. I understand your reasoning there......no questions at all. And I'm glad you won, even though I don't know you! LOL! It's a real "cold deck" though having Aces when the other player is rolled up but......you indeed held the best there and it's nice to see it hold up, or should I say "improve" when it was in danger. Thanks for sharing your thoughts Barry, and you or anyone here can feel free to add to what my thoughts were in both hands mentioned here. Two very similar hands......yet different. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| OK, It wasn;t me. But.., Barry T, 11. Aug 2003 10:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi. OK, I am convinced it wasn't me. I was in the 4 seat nd my oponent in the 8. And indeed stud is not my main game, though I do enjoy it. I like to be able to play rotation games, so I stay with stud. I think my best game is stud/8, though it may have actually have become hold'em after all these hours. But it is one hell of a coincidence. If this was online, I would say the software was broken :-). Amazing. Anyway, thanks for posting an interesting stud thread. BarryT | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: OK, It wasn;t me. But.., stdioh, 11. Aug 2003 10:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I find that I'm a decent enough stud player, but I get my ass handed to me at stud8. I always find myself in awkward positions where I'm holding a gutshot, a draw to a good 7, and a flush draw, then make my 7, make my straight, and manage to lose both halves of the pot. Though I think if we lived in a perfect world, every room would spread pot limit omaha 8. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, stdioh, 11. Aug 2003 09:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Essentially, lets say that this player is really good and put the opponent on exactly the hand that he had. Likewise the player holding AA is going to read his opponent for J7 because what else would he have to jam like this. For the sake of the following, I'm assuming that both men were playing their cards face up, for all intents and purposes. The player with the AA is a favourite to win the hand. He's got 4 live outs to a straight, 2 clean aces, and 9 clean outs to aces up, for a total of 15 outs. With 16 cards used out of the deck (I'm assuming it was 8 handed, everybody else folded on 3rd street and nobody lost any outs to others' door cards) that gives him exactly a 2/3 chance of making a hand that beats JJ77. On the other side, assuming that the remaining jacks and sevens are live, he's only got 4 outs. We'll assume that one card comes to make the opponent's hand too so he's got 17 cards accounted for, giving him only a 22% chance of tightening up if his opponent makes a hand. So basically, he's holding the best hand now, but he's an underdog by the river and he knows that he can't fold AA off the hand. That means waiting to see a better card. If 6th street brings his opponent a total brick then he'll be a favourite again and can bet it. If 6th street brings a scare card, all he can do is call and have about a 10% chance of tightening on 7th street. So the long story short is that if he read his opponent correctly then he played correctly on every single street. On 4th street he was a favourite and jammed as much as he could. On 5th street he became an underdog so he check-called. And on the river he had to raise his tight even knowing that his opponent held AAA because chances were slightly in his favour that the opponent didn't tighten up himself...especially since the original 7th street bet was made in the smoke. Had the bettor looked at his seventh card and then bet the river, the correct play would be to just call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 08:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Aug 2003 10:13 4 POKER wrote: > I observed a hand the other night at the Bellagio, $40-80 seven card stud. A > player (presumed to be a "strong/solid player") raises in an unopened pot in > late position with split Jacks/seven kicker. (The way the hand was played out, > it was definitely not pocket jacks.....anyway), the bring in just calls with a 3 > door card. (he holds pocket Aces). On the turn, the split Jacks catches a seven, > now giving him two pair on fourth street. The bring in catches a five to go > along with his three door. The Jacks up hand bets, gets raised, he re-raises it, > gets raised back and now the pocket Aces just calls. That's five bets going in > on the turn here. you mean 4th street in stud as in hold em the turn is just befor the river it is also refered to 6th street by savy stud players. this is a common move in stud ( to slow play your way into a hole then try to raise your way out) but i feel it is a bad one. not only has the AA gone from a big favorate to a small dog he has virtually gaurenteed having to call bets on every round if he is beat. if he improves with on open pair he often wont get paid off unless he is beat . and has made the pot so large that he is darn near bound to see the river even unimproved. And has made it correct for his opponent to redraw to a hand that can beat A's up. > > Now, (and this is what I don't quite understand by the good players actions). > On fifth street the Jacks up hits a blank, and the pocket Aces hits a duece, for > a board read of 3-5-2, all offsuit. NOW, the Jacks up hand decides to just check > and call here. My thoughts were, if he was willing to put in five bets, while > getting in the last raise I may add.....why would he now just check it? What > hand could he possibly give the bring-in on fifth street that he didn't give him > credit for on fourth street? Did he think he made a low straight? IMO, there's > no way he should give this player (pretty tight player as well) a made hand here > if he didn't give him a set on fourth street. If he thought his hand was that > good on fourth, which he obviously did by all his re-raising.....why would he > now back off? It's like after he made all those raises, he now decides to give > this guy trips, but that thought never even crossed his mind on fourth street > when the bring- in got extremely aggresive as well. > the J'sup has decided to represent a slow play and or doesnt want to make the pot so big that it is correct for the opponent to redraw to the gut shot. or is trying for a free card & hoping to catch big and suited. another posibility is he is want ing to get the A's to lead even if they are beat. by checking he is gaining position on a weaker hand and even hold em players know that is good. I disagree with the play and would have bet out again and would continue to do so unless my opponent open pairs or catches a big card and again raises. although I might check and hope to get 2 bets with river improvement > On sixth street, the Jacks up hand caught another blank and the pocket Aces > caught the third Ace, putting him way in the lead now. Jacks up checked it > again, (which was ok, given that this guy caught a scare card Ace)....the trip > Aces bet again, (obviously), and was called. River......trip Aces "smoke > bets"....Jacks up catches the third Jack for a full house and raises. The trip > Aces squeezes his cards.....no improvement, and just calls. > > IMO, the player who held jacks up played his hand poorly, and not because he > put in 5 bets on fourth street, but because he simply just check-called on fifth > when his check was unwarranted if he really thought his Jacks up was good enough > on fourth. If it were stud 8 or better, I'd say yeah...when your opponent shows > 3-5-2, you better know to back off with jacks up after multiple raises, but not > in stud high. I was wondering, what hand did he put him on to begin with after > all those raises? A high pocket pair? Two smaller pair? Well *both* of those > holdings he has beat at this point. And he neglected to put him on trips, > obviously....so why no more betting now on fifth? he might have wanted to get the A's tied on till the end. which can happen if you can get a big pair to bet out. they often will continue to do so even when they are second best. when the AA tripped the J'sup wasnt for sure it was a triplet because some players will make this same play with KK or even QQ pocketed. the pot was big enough with infered pot odds for him to draw at the house even if he was beat. two pair hand usually want to get to the end as cheaply as possible while drawing to the house. > > Keep in mind, the player who held Jacks up is considered to be a very strong > player.. ............While the other player is conservative,(not a pro or > anything), but plays well. > > > > Thoughts?.............seasoned stud players? > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, 4 POKER, 12. Aug 2003 14:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 12. Aug 2003 08:20 timmer wrote: > on 10. Aug 2003 10:13 4 POKER wrote: > > I observed a hand the other night at the Bellagio, $40-80 seven card stud. A > > player (presumed to be a "strong/solid player") raises in an unopened pot in > > late position with split Jacks/seven kicker. (The way the hand was played out, > > it was definitely not pocket jacks.....anyway), the bring in just calls with a 3 > > > door card. (he holds pocket Aces). On the turn, the split Jacks catches a seven, > > > now giving him two pair on fourth street. The bring in catches a five to go > > along with his three door. The Jacks up hand bets, gets raised, he re-raises it, > > > gets raised back and now the pocket Aces just calls. That's five bets going in > > on the turn here. > > you mean 4th street in stud as in hold em the turn is just befor the river it is > also refered to 6th street by savy stud players. Timmer, Actually.......the term "turn" is also used in stud when talking about 4th street, in fact, it is more commonly used by the "savy stud players"! Good analogy on the hand......I think stud is a game that reqires alot of depth and is a great topic for discussion. 4 POKER > > this is a common move in stud ( to slow play your way into a hole then try to raise > your way out) but i feel it is a bad one. not only has the AA gone from a big > favorate to a small dog he has virtually gaurenteed having to call bets on every > round if he is beat. if he improves with on open pair he often wont get paid off > unless he is beat . and has made the pot so large that he is darn near bound to see > the river even unimproved. And has made it correct for his opponent to redraw to a > hand that can beat A's up. > > > > > > > Now, (and this is what I don't quite understand by the good players actions). > > On fifth street the Jacks up hits a blank, and the pocket Aces hits a duece, for > > > a board read of 3-5-2, all offsuit. NOW, the Jacks up hand decides to just check > > > and call here. My thoughts were, if he was willing to put in five bets, while > > getting in the last raise I may add.....why would he now just check it? What > > hand could he possibly give the bring-in on fifth street that he didn't give him > > > credit for on fourth street? Did he think he made a low straight? IMO, there's > > no way he should give this player (pretty tight player as well) a made hand here > > > if he didn't give him a set on fourth street. If he thought his hand was that > > good on fourth, which he obviously did by all his re-raising.....why would he > > now back off? It's like after he made all those raises, he now decides to give > > this guy trips, but that thought never even crossed his mind on fourth street > > when the bring- in got extremely aggresive as well. > > > > the J'sup has decided to represent a slow play and or doesnt want to make the pot > so big that it is correct for the opponent to redraw to the gut shot. or is trying > for a free card & hoping to catch big and suited. another posibility is he is want > ing to get the A's to lead even if they are beat. by checking he is gaining position > on a weaker hand and even hold em players know that is good. > > I disagree with the play and would have bet out again and would continue to do so > unless my opponent open pairs or catches a big card and again raises. although I > might check and hope to get 2 bets with river improvement > > > On sixth street, the Jacks up hand caught another blank and the pocket Aces > > caught the third Ace, putting him way in the lead now. Jacks up checked it > > again, (which was ok, given that this guy caught a scare card Ace)....the trip > > Aces bet again, (obviously), and was called. River......trip Aces "smoke > > bets"....Jacks up catches the third Jack for a full house and raises. The trip > > Aces squeezes his cards.....no improvement, and just calls. > > > > IMO, the player who held jacks up played his hand poorly, and not because he > > put in 5 bets on fourth street, but because he simply just check-called on fifth > > > when his check was unwarranted if he really thought his Jacks up was good enough > > > on fourth. If it were stud 8 or better, I'd say yeah...when your opponent shows > > 3-5-2, you better know to back off with jacks up after multiple raises, but not > > in stud high. I was wondering, what hand did he put him on to begin with after > > all those raises? A high pocket pair? Two smaller pair? Well *both* of those > > holdings he has beat at this point. And he neglected to put him on trips, > > obviously....so why no more betting now on fifth? > > > he might have wanted to get the A's tied on till the end. which can happen if you > can get a big pair to bet out. they often will continue to do so even when they are > second best. when the AA tripped the J'sup wasnt for sure it was a triplet because > some players will make this same play with KK or even QQ pocketed. the pot was big > enough with infered pot odds for him to draw at the house even if he was beat. two > pair hand usually want to get to the end as cheaply as possible while drawing to the > house. > > > > Keep in mind, the player who held Jacks up is considered to be a very strong > > player.. ............While the other player is conservative,(not a pro or > > anything), but plays well. > > > > > > > > Thoughts?.............seasoned stud players? > > > > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 15:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > > Timmer, > Actually.......the term "turn" is also used in stud when talking about 4th street, in > fact, it is more commonly used by the "savy stud players"! > Good analogy on the hand......I think stud is a game that requires a lot of depth and is a > great topic for discussion. > > 4 POKER > only in pure semantics. In most cases the true describes the card immediately following the river or final card. Just as in Hold em. strangly enough the turn is often defined as the second card on the flop in hold em. timmer | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, 4 POKER, 12. Aug 2003 15:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 12. Aug 2003 15:02 timmer wrote: > > > > > Timmer, > > Actually.......the term "turn" is also used in stud when talking about 4th street, in > > fact, it is more commonly used by the "savy stud players"! > > Good analogy on the hand......I think stud is a game that requires a lot of depth and is a > > > great topic for discussion. > > > > 4 POKER > > > only in pure semantics. In most cases the true describes the card immediately following the > river or final card. Just as in Hold em. > strangly enough the turn is often defined as the second card on the flop in hold em. > > timmer timmer, ..........and you said stud was such a "simpletons" game.......remember? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Stud Hand at The Bellagio, timmer, 12. Aug 2003 17:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 12. Aug 2003 15:37 4 POKER wrote: > on 12. Aug 2003 15:02 timmer wrote: > > > > > > > > Timmer, > > > Actually.......the term "turn" is also used in stud when talking about 4th street, in > > > fact, it is more commonly used by the "savvy stud players"! > > > Good analogy on the hand......I think stud is a game that requires a lot of depth and is a > > > > > great topic for discussion. > > > > > > 4 POKER > > > > > only in pure semantics. In most cases the turn describes the card immediately preceeding the > > river or final card. Just as in Hold em. > > strangely enough the turn is often defined as the second card on the flop in hold em. but when hold em players talk about the turn it is usually in reference to the card preceeding the river. > > > > timmer > > > timmer, > > ..........and you said stud was such a "simpleton's" game.......remember? I lied. That's ok in poker still, isn't it ? ~t | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|