http://igamingforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aPoker+tag%3aSeven-Card+StudSearch results for 'tag:Poker tag:Seven-Card Stud' matching tags 'Poker' and 'Seven-Card Stud'en-USCSMOD (Build: 3273.32735)http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/PokerRules/k/post.htmTue, 20 May 2008 12:29:59 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:10cyborgTexas Hold Em Texas Hold Em is a seven card poker game with simple rules that a beginner can easily learn and begin to play immediately In spite of the simplicity it is a fast and complex game that takes skill and practice to master No wonder it has become one of the most popular forms of poker played today Texas Hold Em uses a disc called a dealer button to indicate where the cards are to be dealt Prior to the deal the two players to the left of the button place live bets called the small and large blinds It s called blind because it s made prior to seeing any cards It s called live because it counts as part of any further bets in the first betting round The play begins with two cards dealt face down to each player Action starts with a betting round beginning with the player to the left of the blind bets and continuing clockwise around the table Players may bet check raise or fold in turn The large blind has the privilege of last action and may check or raise the bet Three community cards are then dealt face up in the center of the table and another betting round takes place beginning with the player to the left of the dealer button Another card is dealt face up followed by a round of betting The fifth and last card is dealt face up and a final round of betting takes place Players remaining in the hand will then show their cards and the winning poker hand will be awarded the pot Any combination of hole cards and community cards may be used to make the best five card poker hand Omaha Omaha is a form of Hold Em that brings a few variables to the table First you ll receive four cards face down prior to the flop and you must use two cards from your hand combined with three cards from the board to form your best five card poker hand Throw in the 8 or better hi lo variable and you ve got a challenge for poker players at all levels Omaha is a nine card poker game that uses a dealer button and blinds as in Texas Hold Em The play begins with four cards dealt face down to each player Action starts with the first player to the left of the blinds beginning the betting Players may bet check raise or fold in turn Community cards are then dealt face up in the center of the table in the same manner as in Texas Hold Em with betting after each round After the final betting round the players remaining in the hand will then show all their cards To qualify for a winning low hand a player must have five cards of 8 or lower with no pair using two from their hand and three from the board Straights or flushes may be used for the low hand if all the cards are 8 or below If there is a qualifying low hand it splits the pot with the winning high hand Other wise the high hand takes the entire pot Remember you must use two cards from your hand and three from the board to make the best five card poker hand Omaha Hi Lo By Jan Fisher As in any dealer button game a random draw will determine the position to start with the button Two blinds will be posted to the left of the button The small blind will be equal to one half the small bet the big blind will equal the small bet Both blinds are live and may raise the pot In the showdown the player must use two cards from his hand and three from the board exactly Player may use different cards for high and low In order for there to be a low there must be a combination of two cards from the players hand and three from the board with a denomination of eight or smaller Ace is low for this purpose If there is no low high will get the entire pot A wheel A 2 3 4 5 is the best possible low and neither straights nor flushes count against you for low If a player misses his blind or blinds he may wait until the big blind to post to come back in Otherwise he must post the missed blinds Only the big blind is live A player who has posted the blind who is not present to act on his hand will have his hand killed and will not get his blind back Winning called hand must show all four cards to be awarded any part of the pot In the event of ties the pot will be split Odd chip will go left of the button on both high and low pot odd chip Seven Card Stud Seven Card Stud is easy for beginners to learn yet challenging enough to hold the interest of seasoned players In Seven Card Stud each player receives two cards face down and one card face up The player with the low card opens the betting Each player in turn must call raise or fold On all subsequent rounds the player with the best hand open the betting Each player is then dealt 3 cards face up with a betting round following each card The last card dealt to each remaining player is face down with the final betting round following Players remaining in the hand will then show their hands and the winning poker hand will be awarded the pot Suits are not used in determining the winning hand and tied hands will split the pot Seven Card Stud Hi Lo High Low Split differs from the high only game in that the player with the highest card must open the betting At the showdown if a qualifying low hand five cards of 8 or below with no pair exists it will be awarded one half the pot and the best poker hand is awarded the other half In the absence of a qualifying low hand the best poker hand wins the entire pot A straight or a flush 8 high or lower may be both the highest and lowest hand in which case it wins the whole pot Five Card Stud All players place a small wager known as an ante The dealer then deals each player two cards one dealt face down known as the hole card and the other face up The player with the lowest ranking up card must place the opening bet Each player to the left of the player making the opening bet must in turn either call the opening bet raise it or fold When this round is complete each player is then dealt another card face up followed by a round of betting This continues until all players have fice cards one face down and four face up or until only one player remains From the third card onwards the betting is started by the highest poker hand showing All players have five cards in their hand one down and four up If there is a showdown players show all five cards The winning hand is the highest ranking five card poker hand Draw Poker To begin two players at the table make a small bet or blind wager before receiving any cards Each player seated in the game takes a turn at placing such a wager Players first receive five cards dealt face down Players pick up the cards and look at them and then decide if they wish to stay in the game If so a bet must now be placed Once all bets are called the first round of betting is complete Players may now choose to exchange with the dealer any number of cards from their hand This is known as the draw Once the draw is complete a second round of betting takes place If all bets are called there is a showdown The winner is the player with the highest ranking hand If only one player remains ie no showdown they will win the pot without having to expose their cards http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/PostYourPokerLibrary/2/gpxc/Post.htm#34053Tue, 05 Aug 2003 20:52:20 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:34053jtautry <jtautry@yahoo>Seven Card Stud for Advanced Players SklanskyHigh Low Split Poker For Advanced Players ZeeWinning Low Limit Hold Em JonesTournament Poker For Advanced Players SklanskyComplete Book of Hold Em Poker Gary CarsonHold em Poker for Advanced Players Sklansy Malmuth Killer Poker John VorhausPot Limit amp No Limit Poker Reuben CiaffoneJThttp://igamingforums.com/iGaming/BorgataTournamentScheduleSatellites/gkhp/post.htmSun, 03 Aug 2003 09:13:24 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:32502mcHere is the schedule for the upcoming tournaments at the Borgata in September Don t ask me where I got them I ll never tell I will list Satellite structure in a separate post due to length Everything is pending CCC approval if you don t give a please disregard this post Event 1 500 40 Limit HoldemStarts at 12 00 noon Wednesday Sept 17th 2003Level 1 25 25 blinds Limit 25 50Level 2 25 50 Blinds Limit 50 100Level 3 Limit 100 200Level 4 150 300Level 5 200 400Level 6 300 600Level 7 500 1000Level 8 800 1600Level 9 1000 2000Level 10 1500 3000Level 11 2000 4000Level 12 4000 8000 LimitPlayers start with 2000 in chips Each level is 60 minutes 15 minute break at end of every 2 levels Dinner break at 6 00PM 1 hour Event 2 Seven Card Stud 500 40 Buy In Starts at 12 00 Noon on Thursday Sept 18th 2003Level 1 10 Ante 15 Low card Limit 50 100Level 2 15 Ante 25 Low card Limit 100 200Level 3 25 Ante 50 Low card Limit 150 300Level 4 25 Ante 75 Low card Limit 200 400Level 5 50 Ante 100 Low card Limit 300 600Level 6 75 Ante 200 Low card 500 1000Level 7 100 Ante 300 Low card Limit 800 1600Level 8 200 Ante 300 Low card Limit 1000 2000Level 9 200 Ante 500 Low card Limit 1500 3000Level 10 300 Ante 500 Low card Limit 2000 4000Level 11 500 Ante 1000 Low card Limit 3000 6000 Level 12 1000 Ante 2000 Low card Limit 5000 10 000Players start with 2000 in chips Each level is 60 minutes etc Same as above Event 3 NL Hold em 500 40Starts at 12 00 Noon Friday Sept 19 2003Level 1 25 50 BlindsLevel 2 50 100 BlindsLevel 3 100 200 BlindsLevel 4 25 Ante 100 200 BlindsLevel 5 50 Ante 200 400 BlindsLevel 6 75 Ante 300 600 BlindsLevel 7 100 Ante 500 1000 BlindsLevel 8 200 Ante 800 1600 BlindsLevel 9 300 Ante 1000 2000 BlindsLevel 10 500 Ante 1500 3000 BlindsLevel 11 1000 Ante 2000 4000 BlindsLevel 12 1000 Ante 3000 6000 BlindsLevel 13 2000 Ante 5000 10 000 BlindsPlayers start with 2000 in chips each level is 60 minutes blah blah blah Event 4 WPT Champ NL Hold em 5000 150Starts 12 00 Noon Saturday Sept 20 2003Blind structure is same as 500 40 NL Hold em Players start with 10 000 in chips Each Level is 90 minutes 15 minute break at end of every 2 levelsDay one play continues for 5 levelsDay two plays until final 6 playersDay 3 Final talbe start at 5 00PMTournament Champ receives 25 000 300 entry for April 19 23 2003 WPT championship event Based on 100 players Satellites will be posted next Posted using RecPoker com http www recpoker comhttp://igamingforums.com/iGaming/SklanskyBabyLimitBikeTripReport/gjvv/post.htm#32151Sat, 02 Aug 2003 18:58:22 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:32151gary carson nq 2 Giving a new name to an old concept is a talent David has He sreal good at it But it revolutionize anything nq nq 1 I first started playing poker in the Spring of 1988 1 4 Stud at The Eldorado in Gardena a lot of thought to the game A few months later I read Sklansky s seven card stud book it was nq Public cardroom poker has grown a lot in the last 20 years Malmuth often sees a correlation there he started self publishing his stuff then more and more rooms opened and he sold more and more stuff He sees that and credits himself with contributing to the growth of poker Well his increases in sales have been caused by the growth of public poker it s not the other way around Stud and Hold em got legalized in California partially as a result of Mike Caro influeincing some people but Malmuth and Malmuth s publishing company had nothing to do with that at all Likewise legalization in many other states That s occurred becuase states are looking for another source of revenue and some hit on gambling as a potential source People writing books did not create poker players it s the poker players buying books that caused more books to be written Sklansky hasn t revelutionized anything Some of his work is good work some is not He just happened to be standing there when the poker players came looking His tournament book hit the market just in time for the growth fueled by the Travel Channel and ESPN tournament poker broadcasts I havn t readthe tournament book and I m not sure what his definition of the gap concept is I ve seen reports on the book that suggest two different things One is the gap between the value of chips won and the value of chips lost Tournament players have understood this for a long time The other gap concept that I ve seen attributed to him is the idea that you need a bigger hand to call a raise with than you do to raise most of the time when there are more cards to come Hell that s not even a tournament concept it s a poker concept and his been well known pretty much since poker began Maybe he means something else by gap concept But I don t have to read the book to be very sure that the gap concept is a new name for an old idea nq 1 To this day I still rank this book as one of the best poker theory books I have read nq In the sense that it s the book that helped you the most the first poker book you ve read is probably the best poker book you ve ever read Winning Low Limit Hold em by Lee Jones is 8 on the bestseller lis http garycarson rediffblogs com http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/BookReviewMasonMalmuthsPoker-EssaysVolume/ghqr/post.htmSat, 02 Aug 2003 00:25:17 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:31773quadninesThe book is self published and it shows Caveat emptor VOLUME III PE3 contains many errors It s repetitive poorly organized poorly written and poorly edited Poor binding caused pages to fall out of my copy On the other hand it has plenty of white space and pretty card diagrams And some readers might learn a little The 49 essays in PE3 are split into seven sections such as Technical Ideas and General Concepts Essays don t build upon one another or follow a logical progression and their division often seems arbitrary Several for example have escaped from the In the Cardrooms section and fled elsewhere VOLUME III 2001 270 pages is not for beginners Many themes will baffle readers who are unfamiliar with mathematical expectation for instance because PE3 doesn t explain it Some passages also baffle readers who do grasp expectation since this key concept puzzles Malmuth Other Malmuth books have discussed often repeatedly most PE3 topics Those who have seen the other works might not want to bother with this one Surprisingly I believe such readers are the target audience and might gain a bit from this book The catch is that Malmuth s other books also are poorly written One even has a section entitled A Note on the English where the authors offer excuses for their dreadful writing Sklansky and Malmuth HOLD EM POKER FOR ADVANCED PLAYERS HPFAP 1999 p 9 Many of Malmuth s explanations are so inept that most readers don t understand them adequately Serious players might resolve some confusion by rereading the same book It could be more helpful though to read a new book like PE3 and have the ideas described again in different words Perhaps the second explanation is worse than the first but it might tweak a different brain cell and generate enlightenment It can be boring of course wading through all the old stuff in search of a few new insights Malmuth s protege Dr John Feeney scribbled this prescription Once you ve read all the best books IMO you should still buy most of the others because it s a greatexercise to critique them to see if you can findtheir mistakes and misinformation as well as their good information 7 Nov 1999 LowLimit Books 2 2 Forum Finding Malmuth s mistakes is interesting Not because the exercise is challenging it isn t but because it s profitable to learn how and why serious players err Understanding PokerVOLUME III despite Malmuth s assurances to the contrary We don t publish anything unless we know from first hand experience and that means a lot of time at the tables that what we say is absolutely correct 14 March 2001 Regular 2 2er s Sklansky 2 2Forum This lie is unfortunate Too many people give Malmuth too much credit for being smarter than he really is These folks are more likely to blindly accept his advice rather than critically evaluate it and their bankrolls will suffer Some players learn many poker ideas simply by memorizing what others tell them They can echo the words they hear or read but they poorly grasp the concepts underlying logic This is the cookbook method of learning poker I m sure most of us could read cookbooks and with practice prepare dozens of edible meals If we fail to realize key culinary ideas though we might be unable to improvise when we encounter new situations e g missing ingredients I m not saying a cookbook approach to poker is wrong for everyone It can provide useful guidelines to beginners and recreational players for instance But poker is complex and you cannot memorize plans for all potential scenarios Most serious players therefore critically examine the foundations of this game They build a conceptual framework and add to it as they comprehend the underlying structure of previously unsynthesised ideas With this deeper understanding they better analyze new situations and make more profitable decisions at the table If you re a cookbook player be sure to take Malmuth s advice with a big grain of salt caveat emptor If you re a serious player see how many errors you can spot Why Malmuth Makes MistakesMalmuth isn t the brightest bulb in the chandelier I think Malmuth has a shallow rote knowledge of many poker concepts While he can recite these ideas he seems to poorly grasp their underlying reasoning Should we be surprised then when Malmuth repeatedly embraces incorrect conclusions Please don t misinterpret me I don t believe Malmuth is a complete idiot His poker knowledge appears relatively broad even if much of it is quite shallow Malmuth has spent many hours discussing poker with his mentor David Sklansky Sklansky is a good poker theorist and claims to be an outstanding tutor Some of his knowledge surely has rubbed off on Malmuth at least superficially Contrary to his self hype though Sklansky does make serious errors Since Malmuth doesn t understand certain subjects well he ends up parroting Sklansky s erroneous views Malmuth s logic skills are weak When he attempts to apply ideas to new situations his fallacious reasoning often gets him into trouble Furthermore some of Malmuth s poker instincts are wrong His poor logic allows these bad instincts to taint his advice Malmuth frequently takes a simplistic view of poker He ll see the game in black and white rather than behold its many splendid colors Few poker decisions are one dimensional but don t be shocked when Malmuth describes them that way Worse yet many of his decisions further collapse from a single dimension to an even simpler on off point If a pot is big for example then do everything possible to win it This cookbook method simplifies your poker decisions but produces more wrong choices Caveat emptor When Sklansky listed 2 2 Forum s top 23 hand analysts Malmuth didn t cut it Malmuth isn t the sharpest knife in the kitchen Some of Malmuth s Expectation MistakesWhile many players instinctively view poker from a results oriented perspective solid players usually overrule their guts and take a more mathematical expectations approach For an introduction to expectation see http tinyurl com hqjg QuadNines 7 17 Dec 2001 Understanding EV Parts 1 4 USENET s rec gambling poker RGP Expected value EV calculations can get complex but you often can apply them easily on the river Suppose an opponent bets on the end and the pot now has seven big bets You can beat only a bluff and you figure there s one chance in 12 you re facing a bluff From a basic EV perspective folding is better than calling The pot odds 7 to 1 do not exceed the odds against your winning 11 to 1 Malmuth can sedulously echo this kind of logical analysis but results oriented thinking still infects his essays He exclaims for instance that a fold on my part would be disastrous in this situation if my opponent is bluffing P 123 Details at http tinyurl com 2jug QuadNines 30 Sept 2002 Malmuth PE3 Error Result Oriented Thinking RGP Malmuth isn t the brightest towel on the beach Even if his opponent is bluffing Malmuth s fold could be correct in this scenario from a basic EV perspective Losing a pot can be painful but it s important to realize that a displeasing result doesn t make folding wrong Your decision s correctness depends on information available at the time of that choice not on what eventually happens When Malmuth has original thoughts he s often wrong For example how should you react to someone who never bluffs on the river According to Malmuth Since he never bluffs you should never call Your expectation on the end is also zero because you never give up a bet that you shouldn t P 88 First even beginners know this strategy reeks With your best hands call or raise Yet Malmuth rejects the obvious I m aware that you may occasionally hold a stronghand that you will play perhaps with a raise nomatter who bets But for practical purposes these hands have no impact on the result of this question Pp 88 89 Second even if you follow Malmuth s appalling advice your expectation still should be positive not zero To claim otherwise reveals a serious misunderstanding of the concept Malmuth isn t the sharpest pencil in the box Details at http tinyurl com 5lyo QuadNines 12 Nov 2002 ESSAY Malmuth Bluffing Errors RGP Some of Malmuth s Logic MistakesIn poker the thought process and the logical reasons behind it are frequently more important than whatthe play was If you are thinking about thingscorrectly it is only a matter of time before youbegin to play well 14 Dec 1999 AboutCiaffone 2 2 Forum Malmuth s mistakes can multiply like rabbits When answering a quiz question he uses poor logic to decide you generally should play 87s from early position in loose passive games but not tight passive ones He also employs flawed reasoning to assert you usually can open with QTo from middle position in tight passive games but not loose passive ones Even assuming Malmuth s hand analyses are solid his errors continue From four meager data points he leaps to an unsupported conclusion Thus we see that both loose and passive games and tight and passive games do present the opportunity to play additional hands P 242 Different hands Yes More hands Unknown Suppose we help Malmuth by stipulating that you normally should play additional hands in both types of games Does it logically follow that you should play roughly the same number of hands in either game P 242 Of course not If you follow Malmuth s erroneous advice you ll leave lots of money on the table in loose passive games Malmuth isn t the brightest lantern in camp For details about this cascade of fallacious reasoning see http tinyurl com 5lz7 QuadNines 20 Oct 2002 Malmuth PE3 Error Hand Analyses Logic RGP What if you have Ts9s in the small blind the flop comes Ad7c6h and the pot is pretty big Do you check or bet Malmuth and Sklansky raise eyebrows by proclaiming it is almost mandatory to bet HPFAP p 168 Some readers challenge S amp M s key assumption that a bet always causes opponents to fold hands like KJo In PE3 Malmuth defends that belief He admits there are probably a few games around the country where many players will automatically call this bet regardless of their holding P 28 Yet he asserts they generally are the smallest limit games and we don t write for people who are just interested in making minimum wage P 29 It is not uncommon even at the higher limits tofind many players who not only play too many hands but go too far with their hands These games usually at the lower limits are referred to as no fold em hold em HPFAP p 152 Strike Two Malmuth s false claim is irrelevant It doesn t matter if none of your opponents always cling to any two cards What matters is how likely they are to call one small bet with hands like KJo These hands have two high cards six partial outs and a runner runner straight draw Many higher limit players often call with these hands when pots are large Strike Three Malmuth is inconsistent In the T9s scenario he claims good players should fold hands like KJo when the pot is big Yet he advises the opposite The point is that when a lot of bets are in the center of the table you don t worry about saving bets You do everything possible to maximize your chance of winning HPFAP p 169 Malmuth isn t the sharpest tool in the shed Details at http tinyurl com 5ly9 QuadNines 27 Jan 2003 Malmuth s PE3 Errors T9s Scenario RGP Another logical banana peel Malmuth slips on is his conviction that cardrooms rely on winning players It needs winning players to be successful Thesepeople help start games and keep games going Without them cardrooms would be hard pressed tohave many games and what games they have wouldcertainly break down quickly P 163 It s not winners who help cardrooms it s regular players Cardrooms probably prefer regular losers to regular winners Malmuth isn t the brightest butterfly in the meadow Details athttp tinyurl com isg6 QuadNines 18 March 2003 Another Malmuth PE3 Error Winning Players RGP Some of Malmuth s Simplistic MistakesMalmuth frequently takes a very simplistic cookbook approach to poker While this might be okay for some beginners serious players usually find it too costly Viewing the world in black and white can make decisions easy but you frequently will be wrong For instance Malmuth believes reading hands is the science of figuring out exactly what your opponent holds P 42 He describes a hand where he decided he must be up against a pair of eights His opponent though also could have had AA AKs AQs or other hands Pp 44 45 Jumping to conclusions is inaccurate so better hand readers usually apply a different technique Sklansky warned Do not put undue emphasis on your opinion of anopponent s hand I know many players who putsomeone on a certain hand and play the rest of the hand assuming he has that hand This is taking the methods of reading hands too far Instead you must put a player on a few different possible hands with varying degrees of probability for each ofthese hands HOLD EM POKER 1996 p 82 Malmuth isn t the sharpest arrow in the quiver Details at http tinyurl com isfy QuadNines 10 Feb 2003 Another Malmuth PE3 Error Reading Hands RGP Malmuth also believes tells only account for a small percentage of what an expert earns P 66 That might be true if an expert shares Malmuth s black and white view I n games like limit hold em and seven card stud the pots frequently get so large in relation to the final bet that you are often better off callinganyway Using tells to fold when there are manychips in the center of the table can be a seriousmistake You may be costing yourself money even if you are only wrong occasionally P 66 Most solid players don t base their decisions just on tells Instead they combine information from tells with other data including pot size to make more informed choices Malmuth isn t the brightest pigment on the palette Details at http tinyurl com isfk QuadNines 13 Jan 2003 Questions About Malmuth and Tells RGP As I stated earlier EV calculations can get complex Under proper conditions shortcuts make reasonable estimates easier Pot odds implied odds and effective odds can be useful but one of Malmuth s shortcuts is so simplistic it endangers your bankroll The concept here is simple When the pot is large I must do everything possible to increase my chances of winning it P 187 Players seeking greater profits should focus on mathematical expectation rather than winning pots As Mike Caro explained about the long run In poker you don t get paid to win pots you get paid to make the right decisions CARO S FUNDAMENTAL SECRETS OF WINNING POKER 2000 p 13 While maximizing your chances of winning a large pot sometimes is your best move other times you should call passively with your long shot draws Further if you never fold when pots are big you ll cost yourself buckets of chips drip by drip Malmuth isn t the sharpest tack in the wall Details at http tinyurl com 5lyi QuadNines 25 Nov 2002 ESSAY Malmuth Win Maximizing Error RGP Some of Malmuth s Other MistakesAfter contemplating hold em matches between large and small pocket pairs Malmuth claims Now if a pair appears on board it has entered the hands of both players and the hand that began best will stay best P 55 Yet small pairs can end up winning by making straights flushes full houses etc Malmuth isn t the brightest candle in the room Details at http tinyurl com 7i35 QuadNines 24 Feb 2003 A Malmuth PE3 Error Narrow Focus RGP He fears that the results of computer poker simulations can be very dangerous P 34 If you mindlessly let the results dictate your strategy then simulations can be costly So can mindlessly following Malmuth s advice Cars are dangerous but they also are useful They become safer as you learn more about them With enough understanding you ll likely find their benefits outweigh their dangers Malmuth isn t the sharpest pick in the mine Details at http tinyurl com isf7 QuadNines 27 Oct 2002 Another Malmuth PE3 Error Computer Simulations RGP For years Malmuth has attempted to allay readers concerns about cheating In PE3 pp 151 152 he embraces comments Sklansky made on the subject although the comments are full of blatant errors Malmuth isn t the brightest flower in the garden Details at http tinyurl com e53e QuadNines 27 May 2003 Another Malmuth PE3 Error Cheating RGP VOLUME III contains many more errors but I ve made my point Caveat emptor Let the buyer beware Some of Malmuth s GemsPoker isn t simple Even Malmuth admits you won t win much money with a cookbook method He can talk the talk but he frequently stumbles when he tries to walk the walk Once you have read most of the good books and have a grasp of the important poker concepts it s time to put it all together Of course putting it alltogether isn t easy and requires much thinking about the game both at and away from the table P 176 Another good passage On the other hand there is no question that thevalue of a starting hand at limit hold em isaffected by many things These include thestructure of the game your position the number of players in the pot how much it costs to play the quality of your opponents your own playing skills how your opponents perceive you whether there is a maniac in your game whether someone is steaming and the type of game that you are in P 117 Maximizing expectation can be hard When a pot is big Malmuth mindlessly opts to maximize his chance of winning the pot instead At least he ponders expectation before the flop So when is it best to limp or raise with two aces Should you be trying to trap people or is it best to limit the field to maximize your chance of winning the pot which may or may not maximize yourexpectation P 112 And here s a tidbit that Sklansky would do well to remember Y ou should not steal every time even if you are100 percent certain of success That is you shouldstill throw your very worst hands away The reason for this is that you do not want your opponent tochange his non existent calling frequency in thissituation By not stealing quite as much as youcould your opponent may never realize that heshould be defending a lot more P 111 A Note on the EnglishIt be bad Malmuth butchers the English language and much of his mess slides by his incompetent editors I shudder when I imagine his manuscripts before editing Malmuth apparently doesn t care about the time and effort readers must expend to decipher his work Poor sentence structure grammar punctuation usage and vocabulary make the chore needlessly difficult His abuse of commas for example is almost criminal These miniature road signs help guide readers through sentences Inappropriate commas can take you down false detours while absent ones might cause you to miss important turns Different styles allow some latitude in how many commas wordsmiths should employ Still certain authors clearly use too many and others clearly use too few Malmuth uses far too many and far too few Think about it It s okay to judiciously split infinitives and verbs but division should improve word flow not impede it Malmuth however sunders verbs like he is possessed by Lizzie Borden The PE3 index probably was generated by a word processing program and never reviewed You ll find entries for bluff bluffed bluffing and bluffs Why not combine Ciaffone Bob Bob Ciaffone s Ciaffone and Ciaffone s How about dealer dealers and dealer s While most of Malmuth s writing mistakes are minor their overwhelming abundance adds up to a toilsome book http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/SklanskyBabyLimitBikeTripReport/ghpn/post.htm#31769Sat, 02 Aug 2003 00:06:16 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:31769mrbob nq 1 Giving a new name to an old concept is a talent David has He s real good at it But it revolutionize anything nq I first started playing poker in the Spring of 1988 1 4 Stud at The Eldorado in Gardena a quick 25 mile drive from Pasadena A few friends taught me the basics in about 30 minutes before we left for the card club Over the next few months I gave a lot of thought to the game A few months later I read Sklansky s seven card stud book it was mimeographed with a plastic binder spine As I read through each of the chapters my typical thought was either I know that or Hmm haven t thought about that but if I did I think I would reach the same conclusion While I learned very little from reading the book the book was exceptionally valuable it helped to both organize my existing thoughts about the game and to add structure to my mental map of the game To this day I still rank this book as one of the best poker theory books I have read There are few if any new concepts in poker Millions of people have been playing these games for decades Thousands have written in depth about the games To me the value of a poker book comes not from introducing a new topic there aren t any but a new look angle on a collection of existing topics Taking an existing topic and articulating it as the Gap Concept has great value if it is explained so well and so clearly that it attracts a wide readership and changes the way that this readership plays If the change in play of this readership pushes the evolution of the aggregate strategy play to a new equilibrium then Yes Sklansky s writings about the Gap Concept are revolutionary in the same way that his initial Hold em books were revolutionary they changed the game MrBobhttp://igamingforums.com/iGaming/RoyalFlushesSame/zbwr/post.htm#24990Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:28:23 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:24990perry friedman nq 1 AcesLow nq nq 2 Just wondering if anyone has ever witnessed or experienced 2 first hand accounts of back to back royals in ANY poker game nq nq 1 The odds against such multiple Royal Flushes say in seven card stud are interesting to calculate The probability of a Royal set Q 1 P and then calculate probability estimates of NO Royal Flushes in 7 hands Q nq 7 nq 1 exactly ONE Royal Flush in 7 hands Q nq 6 x P x 7 nq 1 and so then just add those two probabilities together and subtract from 1 to get the probability estimate for MORE Test your intuition Will this independence of hands approximation yield an OVER estimate or an UNDER estimate of the likelihood of MORE than one Royal Flush nq I believe it is under because one player holding a royal should slightly increase the chances of aother player having a royal This is a little easier to show if you are just talking about being dealt 5 and only 5 cards since you then don t need to worry if the remaining cards in the royal flush hand block other royals The odds of being dealt a royal in exactly 5 cards is 1 in 649 740 52C5 4 Now if one person has a royal the odds of another specific player havign a royal are 1 in 511 313 47C5 3 With no other info player A s chances of a royal are 1 in 649 740 and so are player B s chances However if you know player A has a royal player b s chances now increase by over 20 Perryhttp://igamingforums.com/iGaming/RoyalFlushesSame/zrhh/post.htm#24691Sat, 26 Jul 2003 00:01:01 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:24691barbara yoon AcesLow nq 1 Just wondering if anyone has ever witnessed or experienced 2 Royal flushes taking down the same pot in a game 4 Or if Russ is involved 5 Also any first hand accounts of back to back royals in ANY poker game nq The odds against such multiple Royal Flushes say in seven card stud are interesting to calculate The probability of a Royal Flush in 7 cards is P 4 324 133 784 560 1 30 940 and with 7 players if you want to approximate by assuming that all their hands are independent set Q 1 P and then calculate probability estimates of NO Royal Flushes in 7 hands Q 7exactly ONE Royal Flush in 7 hands Q 6 x P x 7 and so then just add those two probabilities together and subtract from 1 to get the probability estimate for MORE than one Royal Flush in 7 hands Test your intuition Will this independence of hands approximation yield an OVER estimate or an UNDER estimate of the likelihood of MORE than one Royal Flush http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/CalculatingOdds/vxww/post.htm#23842Fri, 25 Jul 2003 08:30:23 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:23842al.kaseltzer nq 2 In Seven Card Stud if in your first three cards POINTS tell me the formula used to obtain the answer nq nq 1 I can give you an approximate formula for hold em where less cards are dealt out For seven card stud I m having trouble adjusting for the probabilities that someone else is going to get the cards you need nq It makes no difference either our hero gets a pair or the cards go someplace else you don t need to enumerate all the places they might go The problem is equivalent to asking the odds of getting a pair in 5 cards given that one pair has already been removed from the deck I can t be arsed to work it out when I know Barbara will be along any time now http://igamingforums.com/iGaming/CalculatingOdds/vnwd/post.htm#23548Thu, 24 Jul 2003 23:07:00 GMTe9fc6c38-44c2-448e-ad72-ab9133b77580:23548scott seidman nq 1 In Seven Card Stud if in your first three cards you have a pair what are the odds of getting a second pair BONUS POINTS tell me the formula used to obtain the answer nq I can give you an approximate formula for hold em where less cards are dealt out For seven card stud I m having trouble adjusting for the probabilities that someone else is going to get the cards you need Scott