Mark Gritter (markgritter) wrote,
Mark Gritter

Razz blog

pmpoker pointed me at an all-Razz blog, now syndicated at brickinthenutz. I'm not sure what I think of the quality of posts there yet, though...

The most recent entry rants about some idiot who's very proud of how he played his Q bringin against a raise and a call.

"The call was 35 into a 150 or so pot." Now, his Q may actually have close to 19% equity hot + cold. ProPokerTools says Q43 vs. (8-8-5) (8-8-7) is about 16% to win. But what happens on 4th?

Suppose the Q catches near-perfect, one player gets a 9 and the other gets a 2. Then we get an interesting situation where the 9 can afford to play "chicken" while the Q cannot:

(43)Q2: 25%
(8-8-)59: 25%
(8-8-)72: 50%

(8-8-)59: 40%
(8-8-)72: 60%

(43)Q2: 35%
(8-8-7)2: 65%

If the 72 bets and the 59 is next, he should clearly raise.

185 pot + 150 on 3rd round = 335, the 9's share is 84 chips, profit = 35 chips.
185 pot + 300 (bet-raise-fold-3bet-call) on 3rd round * 40% = 194 chips, profit = 44 chips.

If the 72 bets and Q2 is next, he can only call if he assumes that the 59 won't pop it. The Q can't raise because (185 pot + 300) * 35% = 170, profit = 20 chips. Paying 150 chips for 25% equity isn't a good idea either--- is the implicit threat of a suicide raise enough to dissuade Q, or should he call on the theory that the 9 can't give the Q the wrong odds by raising once his extra 50 is in the pot?

The 72's best option in that case may be to try for a check-raise, which is profitable for both the 59 and the 72 at the expense of the Q.

So, there will be a lot of situations in which the Q gets forced out on 4th even if he could continue for a single bet; many situations in which he catches another paint card or pair; and even a fair number of situations in which both his opponents catch good. He needs not just 19% equity in the pot but a 19% probability of being able to continue past 4th profitably.

So, I'm all for giving the smackdown to Razz monkeys who think that more players in the pot with decent hands gives them better odds. But the Razz blog's entry ends with "...Razz can be very streaky and this is exactly why I say to double up and leave the table when playing cash. This has worked very well for me." Right. Because you have such a good sample of what continuing to play in those situations would have won or lost.
Tags: poker, razz
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.