I'm excited about the surge in posts in the oft neglected section of this forum. I have noticed a philosophical difference regarding the stud variants. One of the commonalities about the way that the vast majority of peopel who play the stud variants here is a very agressive style of play. I dont know flatfishy or ED's stats, but I would gues that they are relativly close to my own (20 vpip/10 3rd st raise/3 af). Piers, who has improved my game tremendously, plays an even more agressive game (27/20 last I checked).
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several advantages to playing this style.

1. It makes you much harder to read and puts more pressure on your opponents. If people know that they are going to be forced to put more moneyin the pot, it puts a tremdous amount of pressure on them. You are able to punish people for playing marginal hands.

2. You get away with a ton of value bets that either win or force people to fold marginal hands. Checking 7th with a semi decent hand (2 pair, a 9 low, etc) will often lose you that last bet if you do not regularly put it in. Which leads to...

3. You almost get paid off with your monsters. Once people see me bet my high pair, or 10s and 8s, I will get paid off on almost any hand for the rest of the session. This might not seem like a big advantage, but it is huge over the long run.

There are other factors, two of which I want to mention. You have to be able to fold hands. Blind agression will not work. Also, I (and I would assume this goes for the above mentioned players) play significantly tighter than the games we play. My vpip on the cryptos (where I spend most of my time) is around 20%. The average table (and player) vpip is around 45%.
Playing better hands more agressivly than the rest of the table = +ev.

Anyway, I figured this thread would give us a place to discuss this in the abstract without spreading it over a bunch of threads.

-Jus

I play mostly on PS, and all S8b the tables are a lot tight, finding a table above 36% of the players to the flop is tough. My VPIP is usually around 17%-19% depending on the games.


PFR is 6%, AG is 1.8.

This is probably pretty close to my O8b stats which is one of my most profitable games.

I play with agression but tend to be passive (as you know). It has worked well for me and a few other players i know who are more profitable than me.

My game vaires a lot depending on table conditions though. If I think aggression will be profitable, i use it.

I don't know shit all about stud high.

Razz feels fairly natural to me since I play a lot of TDL and split games.

It seems like there is a wide variety of profitabe styles in the split games.

Maybe I should, probably will. I stumbled with it in a couple of half-hearted attempts at Full Tilt. But that WAS several months ago, before I got just a tad bit smarter about stud games. And it wasn't at Poker Stars, which can be a fish pond.

My stud game has gone through fits and starts. A few months ago, on something of a cooler, and after reading 7CSFAP, I experimented with a passive limping style on third, in an attempt to keep the pot small and to allow drawing opponents to make mistakes on later streets. I took a bath. My aggression is much higher now than it ever has been, running close to Jus' numbers except my 5th street aggro number is closer to 5. The aggressive style has some advantages as Jus points out, and can tilt a table. However, it is also a pretty high variance style of play and the swings can be pretty big. I have also experimented with playing the PL7CS games on B2B and Prima, and will play the prima games again when clearing bonuses on that network (damn B2B banning US players (although I don't fault them and would advise them to do the same thing if I was their US counsel)).

Stud is not my bread and butter game like it is Jus'. I play a lot of different games, and I mostly play stud to clear Wm. Hill bonuses, for a change of pace, and playing HORSE tourneys at Full Tilt (and now stars of course). I used to play stud live a lot, but the games have completely dried up around here in favor of hold'em. In the old days, when stud was more popular and not many of the card rooms around Nor. Cal. spread much hold'em, I played a passive style and was break-even to slightly losing. After finding BTP, and reading Jus, Piers, and flafishy's posts, and reasoning behind them, my stud game is far more profitable, and I have more of a dominating table presence, especially when I go to a live 5/10 game where the players are not aggro and the average age of the other players is death +5. I usually win, they think I am the live one, and it is a lot of fun.

Good topic Jus.

I notice a huge difference in games depending on the size of the ante, Cryptos the 1/2 games have .25 ante, whereas at Stars it is only .10. This and maybe other factors make the games alot tighter/aggressive on 3rd and 4th street at Stars.

I tend to play a little more passively on early streets in Stud and S8b, I usually try and encourage players that play anything and everything to continue doing it and getting trapped in the hand with their small 2 pair, or single big pair type hands. I am alot more aggressive on 5th-7th street, seeing most speculative and live hands to 4th if it is cheap to do so.

I am certainly no expert, though and pretty much play stud and mixed games to keep a fresh interest in Poker. I still don't see how so many people only play one single type of game.

Thanks for the tip of the hat in my direction, Ed.

Maybe I should stop playing and hire myself out as a coach. Because I've been struggling mightily for awhile. It seems like I can't sit down at a table this month without dropping 5 or 6 BB/hr. The stud cash tables these days are where my seemingly healthy draws go to die. I'm just in one of those funks. I do remember a time not that long ago (though it feels like a decade) when I couldn't sit down at a table without winning that 5 or 6 BB/hr.

If it weren't for this forum, I may have given up on it for now. But at least this forum is giving me a place to put my theories and ideas out there, and I do get encouragement from you folks who seem to think they're sound for the most part.

Damn, variance is a bitch.