Mixed Game Challenge Thread

[jmbreslin 0]

i remember when i first started playing 2-7td. i stayed up for like 2 days playing it. its an insanely fun game.

Until the insane frustration sets in, then it isn't so much fun...

[jmbreslin 0]

Level of fun for the 8 game from first to worst for me = Stud 8, Omaha 8, 2-7 TD, LHE, NLHE, PLO, Stud Hi, Razz Razz RAZZZZZZ!!!!!! I needed three extra razzes for obvious reasons.

My list would be similar, except I'd stick LHE near the back and move PLO up. I think I might put Stud Hi at the end. I just find it painfully dry.

[uncooper 1]

For the record, the bet after the first draw wasn't a c-bet bluff; I thought it was a value bet. If everyone else drew two, then I can assume that they had 3 playable cards pre-1st draw. Being that its equally probable that we all missed or improved, the only thing that separates one from another after the 1st card draw is the quality of our 3 playable cards. Because 752 is a pretty good 3-card hand, it rates to be the best 3-card hand most of the time. Thats why I bet it.

It's not a value bet if anyone has improved by a card. Additionally, now I know that when you check OOP and take the same 2 cards, you have 863, not 752. I don't know if this is extremely exploitable, but it isn't a good thing.

go make some threads in the draw forum it could use some attention.

This.

You are most likely beat here but you should have never bet the T in the first place on the river.

Unless the guy has a note that says "called riv vbet with 44 when he took 1 and I was pat".edit: or if you've shown down a snow recently.

[antistuff 0]

is it just me or have the lower limit 2-7 games gotten softer?

[antistuff 0]

whatcha guys think of this fold?PokerStars Game #23581455981: Triple Draw 2-7 Lowball Limit ($1/$2) - 2009/01/04 21:06:24 ETTable 'Radegast' 6-max Seat #3 is the buttonSeat 1: Chef Johnson ($10.50 in chips) Seat 2: antistuff ($63 in chips) Seat 3: jackstraw73 ($24.75 in chips) Seat 4: Sodbuster11 ($103.50 in chips) Seat 5: el dopo ($40 in chips) Seat 6: Mon$terBGone ($105.25 in chips) Sodbuster11: posts small blind $0.50el dopo: posts big blind $1*** DEALING HANDS ***Dealt to antistuff [7h 2c 4h 4s 9c]Mon$terBGone: folds Chef Johnson: folds antistuff: raises $1 to $2jackstraw73: raises $1 to $3Sodbuster11: calls $2.50el dopo: folds antistuff: calls $1*** FIRST DRAW ***Sodbuster11: discards 2 cardsantistuff: discards 2 cards [4s 9c]Dealt to antistuff [7h 2c 4h] [6d 8h]jackstraw73: stands pat Sodbuster11: checks antistuff: checks jackstraw73: bets $1Sodbuster11: calls $1antistuff: calls $1*** SECOND DRAW ***Sodbuster11: stands pat antistuff: stands pat on [7h 2c 4h 6d 8h]jackstraw73: stands pat Sodbuster11: checks antistuff: checks jackstraw73: bets $2Sodbuster11: calls $2antistuff: foldsshould i have tossed the 8 and drew a 3 or a 5?

[uncooper 1]

whatcha guys think of this fold?PokerStars Game #23581455981: Triple Draw 2-7 Lowball Limit ($1/$2) - 2009/01/04 21:06:24 ETTable 'Radegast' 6-max Seat #3 is the buttonSeat 1: Chef Johnson ($10.50 in chips) Seat 2: antistuff ($63 in chips) Seat 3: jackstraw73 ($24.75 in chips) Seat 4: Sodbuster11 ($103.50 in chips) Seat 5: el dopo ($40 in chips) Seat 6: Mon$terBGone ($105.25 in chips) Sodbuster11: posts small blind $0.50el dopo: posts big blind $1*** DEALING HANDS ***Dealt to antistuff [7h 2c 4h 4s 9c]Mon$terBGone: folds Chef Johnson: folds antistuff: raises $1 to $2jackstraw73: raises $1 to $3Sodbuster11: calls $2.50el dopo: folds antistuff: calls $1*** FIRST DRAW ***Sodbuster11: discards 2 cardsantistuff: discards 2 cards [4s 9c]Dealt to antistuff [7h 2c 4h] [6d 8h]jackstraw73: stands pat Sodbuster11: checks antistuff: checks jackstraw73: bets $1Sodbuster11: calls $1antistuff: calls $1*** SECOND DRAW ***Sodbuster11: stands pat antistuff: stands pat on [7h 2c 4h 6d 8h]jackstraw73: stands pat Sodbuster11: checks antistuff: checks jackstraw73: bets $2Sodbuster11: calls $2antistuff: foldsshould i have tossed the 8 and drew a 3 or a 5?

I think you have great implied odds to ditch the 8 after the first draw.As played, I declare this hand wacky as a mofo. I play a lot lower than this, but 2 people smooth call 1 bet from a predraw pat hand, and then both pat themselves just about 0% of the time in my games. Fold can't be a big mistake, and is probably the best move.edit: I just realized sodbuster's line is way fishy. He cold calls the 3b in the sb, takes 2, c/c, pats? At the micros this is like a 98 but at this level, is this the nuts trying to trap? Any reads on this player?

[antistuff 0]

I think you have great implied odds to ditch the 8 after the first draw.As played, I declare this hand wacky as a mofo. I play a lot lower than this, but 2 people smooth call 1 bet from a predraw pat hand, and then both pat themselves just about 0% of the time in my games. Fold can't be a big mistake, and is probably the best move.edit: I just realized sodbuster's line is way fishy. He cold calls the 3b in the sb, takes 2, c/c, pats? At the micros this is like a 98 but at this level, is this the nuts trying to trap? Any reads on this player?

its wacky because they are both passive and scared and don't know how to get any value from their hands. they both had better 8s than me. the third draw went check check and i think sodbuster actually won.i think it was a bad fold. at worst i have four outs, and at best i have eight. with the pot this big i should have drawn one more.

[checkymcfold 0]

i don't understand why you'd pat behind if you were going to muck later on.

[uncooper 1]

i don't understand why you'd pat behind if you were going to muck later on.

I'm assuming he thought that worse hands than his would slow down, but better ones would keep firing.Does anyone disagree with ditching the 8 after 1st draw?

[antistuff 0]

i don't understand why you'd pat behind if you were going to muck later on.

ugh you're right that was a huge mistake i dunno what i was thinking.

[uncooper 1]

its wacky because they are both passive and scared and don't know how to get any value from their hands. they both had better 8s than me. the third draw went check check and i think sodbuster actually won.i think it was a bad fold. at worst i have four outs, and at best i have eight. with the pot this big i should have drawn one more.

Well, assuming you would have tried to c/r if you binked, the fact that it went c/c is bad for the case for drawing to a seven on the end.

[checkymcfold 0]

I'm assuming he thought that worse hands than his would slow down, but better ones would keep firing.Does anyone disagree with ditching the 8 after 1st draw?

i probably break half the time and go berserk half the time, tbh

[uncooper 1]

i probably break half the time and go berserk half the time, tbh

I just think that the draw is so good and he's got 2 shots at it, and the information available after the 1st draw points to a sweet ass implied odds situation. Maybe I'm biased by the extra info I have now though.

[gfdsa146 0]

It's not a value bet if anyone has improved by a card.

Yeah I know. But since I can't think of a way to distinguish whether this case is the minority rather than the majority, I declare it to be a break even proposition and move onto the quality of my 3 cards to determine whether the bet is for value or if its a bluff.

Additionally, now I know that when you check OOP and take the same 2 cards, you have 863, not 752. I don't know if this is extremely exploitable, but it isn't a good thing.

Is this to say that when i check OOP and take the same two cards (I don't get what you mean by the same two cards), I could have 863 and not 752? I don't get what you were trying to say...I'm confused.Ok, I just read over my post I realize that it could be interpreted the wrong way. I'd like to declare that there is no hostility in this. Just pure strat discussion. There are no intentions of starting an e-fight with someone, or dictating to players superior to me how they should play 2-7 TD. I am also not closed minded, and am willing to change my thought processes given that I'm convinced of an alternative argument.

[checkymcfold 0]

OOP with all 3 of you taking 2 cards and you brick, you bet 99%?

missed this. the only exception is when i don't improve drawing two in a 3+way pot, so no, i would not bet there.

[uncooper 1]

Yeah I know. But since I can't think of a way to distinguish whether this case is the minority rather than the majority, I declare it to be a break even proposition and move onto the quality of my 3 cards to determine whether the bet is for value or if its a bluff.Is this to say that when i check OOP and take the same two cards (I don't get what you mean by the same two cards), I could have 863 and not 752? I don't get what you were trying to say...I'm confused.Ok, I just read over my post I realize that it could be interpreted the wrong way. I'd like to declare that there is no hostility in this. Just pure strat discussion. There are no intentions of starting an e-fight with someone, or dictating to players superior to me how they should play 2-7 TD. I am also not closed minded, and am willing to change my thought processes given that I'm convinced of an alternative argument.

There's definitely no e-fight involved! I think I expressed myself really poorly; what I meant was, if OOP you take 2 cards and brick vs two opponents, but you bet when you started with 752, and check when you started with 863, that presents a balance problem. It is exploitable to some extent. In poker we don't like any lines that narrow our range. This brings up a point I've been struggling with. In loose and passive 3D games, I often have my BB limped by 2+ opponents, and I have a hand like 876xx or 765xx. Checking and drawing 2 is exploitable. I have put a bandaid on this situation by checking and drawing 3 to 76xxx or 75xxx respectively.

[checkymcfold 0]

There's definitely no e-fight involved! I think I expressed myself really poorly; what I meant was, if OOP you take 2 cards and brick vs two opponents, but you bet when you started with 752, and check when you started with 863, that presents a balance problem. It is exploitable to some extent. In poker we don't like any lines that narrow our range. This brings up a point I've been struggling with. In loose and passive 3D games, I often have my BB limped by 2+ opponents, and I have a hand like 876xx or 765xx. Checking and drawing 2 is exploitable. I have put a bandaid on this situation by checking and drawing 3 to 76xxx or 75xxx respectively.

i wouldn't sweat being exploitable as to the strength of a 2 cd draw, especially at games where people are bad enough to be open limping a lot. they can likely barely keep up with their own hands, much less pay attention to your check/draw two, imo.

[uncooper 1]

i wouldn't sweat being exploitable as to the strength of a 2 cd draw, especially at games where people are bad enough to be open limping a lot. they can likely barely keep up with their own hands, much less pay attention to your check/draw two, imo.

I fully understand this point, and every time my opponents let me off the hook in situations where I choose value over balance, I make sure to remind myself how lucky I am.That said, unbalanced situations irk the fuck out of me. Another example is HU, 2nd draw we both take 1; I'm in position and brick 8543x; it's checked to me. I bet here with a J, with 98, with 876, with 7643x that I want to snow. But with 8543x that bricks, I check back, and it almost forfeits my position.edit: i declare an e-fight on gfdsa for not posting some spots in the draw forum.

[checkymcfold 0]

I fully understand this point, and every time my opponents let me off the hook in situations where I choose value over balance, I make sure to remind myself how lucky I am.That said, unbalanced situations irk the fuck out of me. Another example is HU, 2nd draw we both take 1; I'm in position and brick 8543x; it's checked to me. I bet here with a J, with 98, with 876, with 7643x that I want to snow. But with 8543x that bricks, I check back, and it almost forfeits my position.

so bet 100% of your range

[uncooper 1]

so bet 100% of your range

Sweet, I pretty much only come to this fag-ass forum to justify betting/raising in situations where checking/folding seem correct.But seriously, I am probably not value-owning myself or getting c/r enough to deny this advice in position, now that I really think about it.

[checkymcfold 0]

Sweet, I pretty much only come to this fag-ass forum to justify betting/raising in situations where checking/folding seem correct.But seriously, I am probably not value-owning myself or getting c/r enough to deny this advice in position, now that I really think about it.

you're not. one card draws vs. each other are basically coinflips, so you're not sacrificing any value really, at all, and you need to keep him from patting jacks by betting.

[Cappy37 0]

Just to toss out another update in my $10 to $100 quest:Hit some snags this week, played 5 sessions of 1-2 hrs, experienced some major shwongs.Nothing fundamentally alarming me so far, been mainly trying to calm myself down from the "win every pot" ferocity I'm prone to employing at times. I don't think I'm playing enough stud-hi and LHE hands, but i tend to convince myself I'm lowering my variance by nitting up in those.And yes, Virginia, most HORSE players still can't play Razz to save their lives. God Bless Them.so.. 6 days into the (I assume I'll get there by...) January Challenge my Challenge Bankroll is up to $39.82.I'm making a small ammendment to the challenge: I'm letting myself play .10/.20 Stud8 and/or Razz tables if there isn't enough tables open for me to open a 3rd table. O8b tables can take forever to lose people, and when I actually get to play, I wanna be able to 2-3 table so I dont fall asleep in the process.I'll post some hands if I come across anything overly hilarious.edit: I see that Daniel is copying my valiant run playing .01/.02 nlhe. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I'll take it as a compliment.

[gfdsa146 0]

edit: i declare an e-fight on gfdsa for not posting some spots in the draw forum.

lol...just been really busy

[jmbreslin 0]

I just checked in at Stars for the first time in a while and noticed very little action in the low stakes 8-game SnGs. Has the interest in those died off already?

[gfdsa146 0]

I've only played the smallest 8-game cash tables and those are always full.