Razz strategy - JD or anyone, what can it be?

Okay, I stole this from the 'real money tourney' section, but there was overlap as to where this belongs, and strategy won....

Jack Daniels said:

I've had my share of brick-brick-brick beats, but overall I'm happy with how I'm progressing against the unknowing.

Click to expand...

Yeah, they start out so beautiful........ then , , ! I'd love to know what it is I should be knowing.

Jack Daniels said:

I don't like PLS8 either, but Limit Razz is a game where skill will win out over stupidity and luck in the long run.

Click to expand...

Okay, seems to be a limited amount of skill in balancing 1) pot building, 2) caution, determining which hands might have you beat (based on what's on board or folded), 3) the likelihood of getting your cards (based on same), etc.. But being the bluffing factor is almost eliminated (within reason????), where would you say most of the 'skill' lies? I'm guessing it's not in #2 or 3.

Obviously, if you have a bad card, better it be in the hole for the semi-bluff. But with the 'limit' factor, you should have at LEAST 2 good cards to start with, or 1 more burns you. I'm thinking 3 cards all lower than an 9, or perhaps an A49 at worst? Does that sound too loose? I know a lot depends on position.

But it often seems to come down to 'cards showing'. Tell you the truth, I've seen enough 'pair brick pair', I'll often sit out the razz part of HORSE. Don't get me wrong, I've won my share of razz hands, but the losses are just too frustrating to play an entire game.

When you say A49 as a starting hand, do you mean to raise or call a raise before 4th street ? Even with A49 I will sometimes flat and wait for 4th street before betting out or raising. A lot depends on what other are showing. eg. you are holding A23 a fine raising hand pre 4th you think, then look around the table and there are no aces showing but 2x4's and 3x5's and no paint from the other 2 players, you now only have 3 cards left in the deck to make the nuts. There are no Aces showing which means A/ someone has 1 or B/ they don't and you could end up pairing. Raising in Razz has to be evaluated not just on what you have, but what the other players have and what they could make. The other part of sometimes flatting with 3 low cards, is it fools many players into thinking your "hole" card is high, ripe for check reraise on 5th.

Pothole said:

When you say A49 as a starting hand, do you mean to raise or call a raise before 4th street ? Even with A49 I will sometimes flat and wait for 4th street before betting out or raising. A lot depends on what other are showing. eg. you are holding A23 a fine raising hand pre 4th you think, then look around the table and there are no aces showing but 2x4's and 3x5's and no paint from the other 2 players, you now only have 3 cards left in the deck to make the nuts. There are no Aces showing which means A/ someone has 1 or B/ they don't and you could end up pairing. Raising in Razz has to be evaluated not just on what you have, but what the other players have and what they could make. The other part of sometimes flatting with 3 low cards, is it fools many players into thinking your "hole" card is high, ripe for check reraise on 5th.

Click to expand...

My, seems you a little looser than me, no worries! No, I would never raise with A49, MIGHT call a raise, depending on what's showing. Yeah that 2x4, 3x5 example is exactly what I meant by 'not #2 or 3', because attention to this does not seem like rocket science to me.

With regard to last comment, in limit, I try to beef up the pot as much as possible after 4th st, because I know people will call, not realizing they're being nickeled & dimed to death. But is 5th St where the bet goes up? might be worth waiting for to not have anyone running scared. Then again, you stand the chance to them catching, and you...not.

Like I said, any insight is much appreciated, so thanks! I will change my style if I can see reason. Yours very enlightening, as was a couple comments in the 'real $ section' re: tonight's game at FT.

Divebitch said:

No, I would never raise with A49,

Click to expand...

Why not? There are times where that might be valid. Say villian is showing a 5 door card and we hold [A4]9. It's folded around to villian to our right and we're the last small card before the bring-in. Villian raises in a classic steal position.

Given the scenario, if I think my opponent will raise here most times with a weaker hand in hopes of stealing the bring in and antes, then I would reraise even with the 9 door card (depending on what cards were already out). I'm raising for two reasons. First to chase the bring-in player out. I'm looking to isolate with the 3rd street raiser. Second is to convey a message to the villian that we have a playable hand against a likely steal. This is a big play for us. If our opponent is weak and flats us, then we probably caught him. If he's weak and raises, then he probably has us beat now but we're priced in to see 4th street and re-evaluate. If he's a good player and flats us then we need to re-evaluate on 4th street anyway as he could be trapping with a strong hand by figuring we reraised to catch him in a steal. And if he's a good player and reraises, then we are priced in anyway because his reraise is probably lite if he views us as a decent player capable of reraising his steal attempt lite. So there is a lot more going on psychologically. Obviously a specific hand scenario would be better than a bunch of hypotheticals, but in this case we're talking about reraising with 94A.

On the flipside, if the bring-in bettor was a Q and it was folded around to me with [K7]5 and say there are three remaining players (two plus the bring-in) showing J, 9, and Q, respectively, then I'm going to raise. That's not loose, it's strategic; an edge to exploit, if you will.

Divebitch said:

But is 5th St where the bet goes up?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Divebitch said:

Then again, you stand the chance to them catching, and you...not.

Click to expand...

See I think this is the wrong way to look at things. Razz is very much a drawing game, but it's not about if they are drawing it is about should they be drawing. I highly suggest getting Sklansky on Poker and reading the 100 page section on razz. A lot of it goes back to his poker theorems (sp?) and the fact you make money when opponents make mistakes. When you have an edge you should exploit it. Sometimes that does mean checking, however checking shouldn't be done because you're scared; it should mean something just like your betting does.

Divebitch said:

Like I said, any insight is much appreciated, so thanks! I will change my style if I can see reason. Yours very enlightening, as was a couple comments in the 'real $ section' re: tonight's game at FT.

Click to expand...

I'd like to see some more discussion get started up in hand analysis as well for either cash or tourney. I have hands, just haven't gotten around to posting much. But it sounds like we may have a reasonable contingent here to get some discussions going.

err, soft 9 is a stay, hard 9 a fold, depending on what is showing all around. If u beat the board u can bet out but never raise.

Makwa said:

err, soft 9 is a stay, hard 9 a fold, depending on what is showing all around. If u beat the board u can bet out but never raise.

Click to expand...

Really? If it was folded to you with [A8]9 and the last cards behind you to act were a Q, Q, and K you wouldn't raise?

Jack Daniels said:

Why not? There are times where that might be valid. Say villian is showing a 5 door card and we hold [A4]9. It's folded around to villian to our right and we're the last small card before the bring-in. Villian raises in a classic steal position.

Given the scenario, if I think my opponent will raise here most times with a weaker hand in hopes of stealing the bring in and antes, then I would reraise even with the 9 door card (depending on what cards were already out). I'm raising for two reasons. First to chase the bring-in player out. I'm looking to isolate with the 3rd street raiser. Second is to convey a message to the villian that we have a playable hand against a likely steal. This is a big play for us. If our opponent is weak and flats us, then we probably caught him. If he's weak and raises **(???)**, then he probably has us beat now but we're priced in to see 4th street and re-evaluate. If he's a good player and flats us **(???)** then we need to re-evaluate on 4th street anyway as he could be trapping with a strong hand by figuring we reraised to catch him in a steal. And if he's a good player and reraises, then we are priced in anyway because his reraise is probably lite if he views us as a decent player capable of reraising his steal attempt lite. So there is a lot more going on psychologically.

Click to expand...

As far as 'conveying you've got a playable hand', is that something you want him to know, rather than have him think you're a donk/calling station? So you mean a weaker player would raise, revealing he had the goods? 'Calling' to trap? Ot if he's REALLY good, he might call thinking YOU will fear a trap and fold to another raise. Obviously, a lot more going on psychologically than I give credit for. But I think sometimes, we might give more credit than is deserved. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Not sure what you mean by 'lite'.

Jack Daniels said:

On the flipside, if the bring-in bettor was a Q and it was folded around to me with [K7]5 and say there are three remaining players (two plus the bring-in) showing J, 9, and Q, respectively, then I'm going to raise. That's not loose, it's strategic; an edge to exploit, if you will.

Click to expand...

Yep, that's what I meant by "But it often seems to comes down to 'cards showing'."

Jack Daniels said:

See I think this is the wrong way to look at things. Razz is very much a drawing game, but it's not about if they are drawing it is about should they be drawing. I highly suggest getting Sklansky on Poker and reading the 100 page section on razz. A lot of it goes back to his poker theorems (sp?) and the fact you make money when opponents make mistakes. When you have an edge you should exploit it. Sometimes that does mean checking, however checking shouldn't be done because you're scared; it should mean something just like your betting does.

Click to expand...

This, too, is tricky. The only time I can see checking is if you're obviously ahead, like to make villain think you've paired up. Never seen a NL Razz, so I always figure, better to beef up the pot asap before villain's hand get's worse. Then there's that 'waiting for after 5th St' we talked about. But why not check if you're scared? Would you recommend raising to a hand that looks on the surface to have you beat? Guess it depends on 'beat by how much?'. lol Anyway, thanks much for the thoughtful response.

Well, a lot of what I said was caveated by knowing (or thinking you know) your opponent and a particular feeling that he would raise here with a 5 door card but yet less than a premium hand.

Divebitch said:

As far as 'conveying you've got a playable hand', is that something you want him to know, rather than have him think you're a donk/calling station?

Click to expand...

If my opponent is a donk then it won't matter because he may not get it anyway, I suppose. If he has a clue, then no, I don't want him thinking I'm a donk. I want to be able to build credibility against a good thinking opponent. I can't make a donk fold to my 6th street checkraise semi-bluff against my strong board, but I can possibly make a good opponent fold there if he gives me credit for my play.

So sure it depends, but if I'm reraising then I sure want him thinking I have a hand. If his door card is a 5 but the last cards to follow behind him are 9, J, K, then this is 99% imo an auto-raise to steal irrespective of the my hole cards. He could be raising with [KJ]5. And that raise will win many times.

Oh, and by "big play for us", I meant in terms of info we're going to get; not really the over-thinking it part. I think flat calling his open raise is the worst decision here. It leaves us totally open to seeing 4th street with no info about where we are at. For that money then just fold to the likely steal and move on. While I personally like reraising here more, I would agree that folding is okay too. But not calling imo, then it's leveraging luck too much.

Divebitch said:

So you mean a weaker player would raise, revealing he had the goods?

Click to expand...

This too comes in knowing our opponent a little. If he is weak player and I believe that about him, then we can reasonably assume his 3-bet means he has a reasonably strong hand that he's willing to play. No further thought here; we can flat the 3-bet as we are priced in an a call is correct. If he is a weak player and flat calls our reraise, then we probably caught him stealing (most times but even donks can be tricky on occassion) and his flat call was likely a mistake for the price based on how far behind he probably is.

If I believe he is a strong player, then he's probably aware of the table too. So he could see my raise as a resteal attempt, but with my 9 door card an aware player should give me some credit as well since I'm clearly raising against his 5. In this case I'm basically saying yeah I don't think you're as strong as you want to believe. So in this case I can flat a 3-bet as being priced in anyway. If he flats me, we should be wary. Again, we're talking about what we believe is a strong player here. Much more thinking involved in what things do/can mean. Obviously limits will start to impact this was well. If it is $.04/$.08, then most of this gets tossed anyway. Plus I'm tired and hungry. /whine. Need to break this into different discussions.

Divebitch said:

Obviously, a lot more going on psychologically than I give credit for. But I think sometimes, we might give more credit than is deserved. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Click to expand...

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Sometimes it is just a cigar. But knowing how to think through the hand based on opponent opposed to whether you need to think too deeply are two different things. Occam's razor, right? Often times the simplest answer is the right answer. But ABC poker can get you killed at the table, too.

Divebitch said:

Never seen a NL Razz, so

Click to expand...

Don't think there is such a thing, tbh.

Divebitch said:

But why not check if you're scared?

Click to expand...

My comment on not checking scared was geared at not checking because you're afraid your opponent will call and out draw you. If you're the favorite in a hand and the correct action is to bet, then it is a mistake to check because you're afraid that your opponent might call and hit a perfect card and take the lead. That's what I meant. If you're going to check in that situation looking for a check-raise because you think he'll bet a weaker hand after you check, then that's one thing. But simply checking because you're worried about variance would be wrong.

Divebitch said:

Would you recommend raising to a hand that looks on the surface to have you beat? Guess it depends on 'beat by how much?'

Click to expand...

Depends.


Tag, you're it.



EDIT: Also, I'm not saying you should reraise every time just because, this is a matter of feel for the table and what villian has done before. If he doesn't steal very often then all of a sudden is completing with a 5 door card, then I'm probably folding there.

Jack Daniels said:

Well, a lot of what I said was caveated by knowing (or thinking you know) your opponent and a particular feeling that he would raise here with a 5 door card but yet less than a premium hand.

If my opponent is a donk then it won't matter because he may not get it anyway, I suppose. If he has a clue, then no, I don't want him thinking I'm a donk. I want to be able to build credibility against a good thinking opponent. I can't make a donk fold to my 6th street checkraise semi-bluff against my strong board, but I can possibly make a good opponent fold there if he gives me credit for my play.

Click to expand...

Surely, I play too many freerolls. So as often as they change tables on ya, rarely certain how good the opponent is. I will wind up folding to a worse hand, and not know whether or not villain thought he might be beat or even CARED. :laugh: It's gotta be different with really money, and it's also got to be different in a 'pure razz' tourney or ring game. In a horse tourney, you may find what you think is a good player, but weak in one area, be it razz or omaha. Also difficult to size up, as some purposely break up their play patterns, just as I might. At any rate, the last comment can be somewhat of a double-edged sword, no? (as in 'folding too quickly for you to get his chips?')

Jack Daniels said:

Oh, and by "big play for us", I meant in terms of info we're going to get; not really the over-thinking it part. I think flat calling his open raise is the worst decision here. It leaves us totally open to seeing 4th street with no info about where we are at. For that money then just fold to the likely steal and move on. While I personally like reraising here more, I would agree that folding is okay too. But not calling imo, then it's leveraging luck too much.


This too comes in knowing our opponent a little. If he is weak player and I believe that about him, then we can reasonably assume his 3-bet means he has a reasonably strong hand that he's willing to play. No further thought here; we can flat the 3-bet as we are priced in an a call is correct. If he is a weak player and flat calls our reraise, then we probably caught him stealing (most times but even donks can be tricky on occassion) and his flat call was likely a mistake for the price based on how far behind he probably is.

Click to expand...

See, this is the part I've read 3x and still don't quite understand. And that's probably due to the fact that I AM that weak player. :laugh: What more information will you have if you reraise him? He's probably not going to fold, even w/JK and 5 showing. And if he reraises, okay, that assumes a good hand. So now I've thrown more money at him, and I'm probably behind? And if he calls? He may or may not be ahead? Guess I'm trying to say that you might have a handle on him, weak or strong, stealing or not. But just not sure any information you get is 1) bulletproof 2) worth the risk with just 3 cards. But I must defer to your expertise, so I'll take your word that it is.

Now... I will often flat-call a reraise with a good hand. But you'd be misinterpreting to think I had been trying to steal. I just want to slow it down a bit until I see a 4th good card by 5th St (and hopefully, he'll have picked up at least one brick by then). His 4th St card is a 2, and I get a K? He will see this. And I'll be check-calling, hoping my hand improves quickly. Is that wrong?

Understood, playing style should be aggressive and not all about damage control, but don't see why folding is better than calling. (we're still talking about the A49, right?) I'd imagine instead that he'd know my cards were at least decent, and he wasn't going to steal anything. Yet. But 'damage control' is how I look at razz in general. You start off w/good cards (because you fold bad ones), and your hand can only get worse - probably. Other games are not like that, not to that degree anyway.

Jack Daniels said:

If you're the favorite in a hand and the correct action is to bet, then it is a mistake to check because you're afraid that your opponent might call and hit a perfect card and take the lead. That's what I meant. If you're going to check in that situation looking for a check-raise because you think he'll bet a weaker hand after you check, then that's one thing. But simply checking because you're worried about variance would be wrong.

Click to expand...

Absolutely understood and agreed. Guess I get a little gunshy about the 'brick brick brick' business, but should get past it with a conscious effort.

Jack Daniels said:

Tag, you're it.

Click to expand...

Been called worse. :laugh: By now, you've probably forgotten what 'it' is. But thanks, appreciate your time and the lengthy discussion.

Divebitch said:

Surely, I play too many freerolls. So as often as they change tables on ya, rarely certain how good the opponent is. I will wind up folding to a worse hand, and not know whether or not villain thought he might be beat or even CARED.

Click to expand...

Ahh. I'm seeing some light. Razz freerolls are to Razz what NLHE Freerolls are to NLHE except that the folks you're playing against in the Razz FR know less about the game than the folks playing NLHE FRs. Obv I'm not including you in that group because you're actually interested in improving (as am I), so the desire and action to learn gives us 100x more credit than the casual Razz donk. Seriously.

Divebitch said:

It's gotta be different with really money, and it's also got to be different in a 'pure razz' tourney or ring game. In a horse tourney, you may find what you think is a good player, but weak in one area, be it razz or omaha. Also difficult to size up, as some purposely break up their play patterns, just as I might.

Click to expand...

Three big things you touched on here that I honestly never even thought to ask about (which is my fault for assuming). All of my Razz posts are made based on three general assumptions: 1) We are playing real money, 2) we are in a full ring (7-8, possibly 6 at the minimum players) table OR we are possibly in a single table tournament though ring game is better, and 3) this is straight Razz, not the R in HORSE. Regarding point 2, this could apply to Razz MTTs too, but you eventually get into the whole table movement issue as well as the game running so long that the antes/BI skyrocket to luckdom.

Divebitch said:

At any rate, the last comment can be somewhat of a double-edged sword, no? (as in 'folding too quickly for you to get his chips?')

Click to expand...

Many things in poker can be. Fundamental Theorems apply both for and against us. If we expect to win money based on our opponent making mistakes, then it stands to reason that we should expect to lose money (or our opponent now expects to win money) when we make mistakes. And winning a hand on 4th street playing correctly is better than losing it on 7th street by playing incorrectly.

Divebitch said:

What more information will you have if you reraise him?And if he reraises, okay, that assumes a good hand. So now I've thrown more money at him, and I'm probably behind? And if he calls? He may or may not be ahead? Guess I'm trying to say that you might have a handle on him, weak or strong, stealing or not. But just not sure any information you get is 1) bulletproof 2) worth the risk with just 3 cards.

Click to expand...

Until actual cards are shown there is nothing absolute in poker. But, as little as it may seem to be, by reraising we get to see what he does and we use that information combined with what we believe his skill level to be to gauge what to do on the next street (assuming we get there) depending on how the cards hit. By flat calling his raise, all we know is his door card is a 5 and whatever we think his skill level is. Now playing 4th street is almost entirely based on what cards come out. His 4th street action is potentially discounted as well because if he hits good and you hit middle or bad, then he bets anyway. Of course I think I said somewhere up above that I wouldn't necessarily play this hand this way every single time either. It could be worth folding in the right scenario.

Fun/sad example: Yesterday I was playing and was dealt [A3]5. Great starting hand in general terms. It was folded around to a guy two to my right with a 6 door card that completed the bet and the guy on my right raises with a 3 door card. I'm next up to call two bets and instead I fold. With just that info you'd wonder why, right? Well [A3]5 looks like a great hand to start, but the board (which I didn't mention before) had two dueces and a four showing. So 3 of my 8 bike outs are gone just from what I can see. Now with so many low cards out and the 6 still opens, he's not stealing (or he's an utter flippin' moron). So we assume he has a good hand and two babies in the hole which may hurt my hand more and even if it doesn't you have a reraiser (who also has a hand on that board) and may likely be impacting my draw. So my great starting hand is really now crap and may be drawing really thin right now. Folding here is the correct play, but it sucks to lay down 53A.

Divebitch said:

He's probably not going to fold, even w/JK and 5 showing.

Click to expand...

That would be awesome if he did. Doing so means he's obviously challenged and taking his money/chips should be easy.

Divebitch said:

But I must defer to your expertise, so I'll take your word that it is.

Click to expand...

Oh heavens no I am not a Razz expert. But I like the discussions and I read a lot.

Divebitch said:

Now... I will often flat-call a reraise with a good hand. But you'd be misinterpreting to think I had been trying to steal. I just want to slow it down a bit until I see a 4th good card by 5th St (and hopefully, he'll have picked up at least one brick by then). His 4th St card is a 2, and I get a K? He will see this. And I'll be check-calling, hoping my hand improves quickly. Is that wrong?

Click to expand...

If I pegged you as a good or at least decent player, then no I wouldn't be misinterpreting your flat call. Instead (I mentioned previously) I would have to reevaluate on 4th street depending on the cards and knowing that you could be trapping with a big hand. But you flatting my reraise there isn't really too bad if you have a good hand. It's an absolute horrible play if you have a bad hand. This too goes back to that extra info I'm getting by reraising.

Divebitch said:

but don't see why folding is better than calling. (we're still talking about the A49, right?)

Click to expand...

We are talking A49 still, but we've wrapped a lot of scenarios around it. Maybe we'd be better off treating this like hand analysis and putting some real data to it.

Divebitch said:

I'd imagine instead that he'd know my cards were at least decent, and he wasn't going to steal anything.

Click to expand...

Yes, he might know that. So now we've successfully given him some info about our hand strength without getting anything in return. At least the reraise gets info in return for sort of conveying hand strength. But I digress...

Divebitch said:

But 'damage control' is how I look at razz in general.

Click to expand...

This is something we should work on, but it goes back to are you playing Razz in HORSE or as a Razz game. In HORSE (and maybe FRs to an extent) damage control is probably a larger part. But in straight up Razz, it isn't.



Note: It's late so I'm not proof-reading this mess I just typed. I reserve the right to say "oops" if I botched something up in my replies.

hey where do you go to read up on this RAZZ game? I was in a free roll on Carbon the other day one of those Horse deals and bam everything changed to that RAZZ game I was lost in the sauce LOL never played it before that day.

Read Sklansky on Poker as JD mentioned.

Also, it's called a "smooth" hand not a "soft" and the opposite is a "rough" hand not "hard". For example, my rough 6 below vs the villain's smooth 7.

You all are welcome to join me anytime. I play almost every night on Full Tilt. Usually I play 2/4 or 3/6 or 5/10, but I was feeling saucy tonight and tried 8/16.

fulltiltpoker Game #8835392247: Table Eastern - $8/$16 Ante $1.50 - Limit Razz - 4:17:51 ET - 2008/11/06
Seat 1: Lucky Loonies ($238.50)
Seat 2: seyedsaada ($169.50)
Seat 3: YoungYeu ($205.50)
Seat 4: SleepingTiger4 ($200.50)
Seat 5: pepperman7 ($448.50)
Seat 6: flop_junk ($189)
Seat 7: Serevi ($448)
Seat 8: skoldpadda9 ($627.50)
seyedsaada antes $1.50
flop_junk antes $1.50
SleepingTiger4 antes $1.50
skoldpadda9 antes $1.50
Serevi antes $1.50
Lucky Loonies antes $1.50
pepperman7 antes $1.50
5 seconds left to act
YoungYeu antes $1.50
*** 3RD STREET ***
Dealt to Lucky Loonies [8s]
Dealt to seyedsaada [Qs]
Dealt to YoungYeu [Kc]
Dealt to SleepingTiger4 [As]
Dealt to pepperman7 [3c]
Dealt to flop_junk [Ad]
Dealt to Serevi [9d]
Dealt to skoldpadda9 [8c 5d] [2s]
YoungYeu is high with [Kc]
YoungYeu brings in for $2
SleepingTiger4 completes it to $8
flop_junk stands up
pepperman7 folds
flop_junk folds
Serevi folds
skoldpadda9 calls $8
Lucky Loonies folds
seyedsaada folds
YoungYeu folds
*** 4TH STREET ***
Dealt to SleepingTiger4 [As] [Ks]
Dealt to skoldpadda9 [8c 5d 2s] [Ah]
skoldpadda9 bets $8
SleepingTiger4 calls $8
*** 5TH STREET ***
Dealt to SleepingTiger4 [As Ks] [2c]
Dealt to skoldpadda9 [8c 5d 2s Ah] [4d]
skoldpadda9 bets $16
SleepingTiger4 calls $16
*** 6TH STREET ***
Dealt to SleepingTiger4 [As Ks 2c] [2h]
Dealt to skoldpadda9 [8c 5d 2s Ah 4d] [6c]
skoldpadda9 bets $16
SleepingTiger4 calls $16
*** 7TH STREET ***
Dealt to skoldpadda9 [8c 5d 2s Ah 4d 6c] [2d]
skoldpadda9 bets $16
SleepingTiger4 raises to $32
skoldpadda9 calls $16
*** SHOW DOWN ***
SleepingTiger4 shows [7s 4h As Ks 2c 2h 3d] 7,4,3,2,A
skoldpadda9 shows [8c 5d 2s Ah 4d 6c 2d] 6,5,4,2,A
skoldpadda9 wins the pot ($171) with 6,5,4,2,A
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $174 | Rake $3
Seat 1: Lucky Loonies folded on 3rd St.
Seat 2: seyedsaada folded on 3rd St.
Seat 3: YoungYeu folded on 3rd St.
Seat 4: SleepingTiger4 showed [7s 4h As Ks 2c 2h 3d] and lost with 7,4,3,2,A
Seat 5: pepperman7 folded on 3rd St.
Seat 6: flop_junk folded on 3rd St.
Seat 7: Serevi folded on 3rd St.
Seat 8: skoldpadda9 showed [8c 5d 2s Ah 4d 6c 2d] and won ($171) with 6,5,4,2,A

elkiddo said:

In the freerolls I will break the top 100 out of 2400 3/5 times

Click to expand...

I can't speak to the public freeroll razz donk fests as they are nothing like real poker...

elkiddo said:

Razz I would say is mostly luck

Click to expand...

however this is totally incorrect. I'd suggest that if you truly believe this then you have a ways to go yet. Sklansky on poker...awesome razz section. Read it, know it, live it.

Just A Few Thoughts

Hmmm, lots of food for thought here.

I was originally introduced to Razz, as opposed to Stud Hi/Lo, at a poker room in Great Falls, Montana shortly after they legalized poker there. Haven't played there for years, but back then, it was Dealer's Choice on the button. Didn't have a clue, so usually just folded out until I finally kinda figured out what was going on. No way to research it, because nobody had ever heard of the internet and about the only way you could get a gambling book was if you subscribed to Gambling Times (anybody else remember that mag?) and ordered one from their "catalog".

Nowadays, I just play it in online freerolls and do okay, cashing fairly often on Full Tilt and even making the FT a time or two. Tried it a couple of times in a home game, but got tired of trying explain, first of all what stud is (young players, my daughter and her friends) and then what lowball is.

Anywho, some thoughts. And a disclaimer is that these comments only apply to online play.

Evidently, I am looser than some (would probably never play a 9 high) and tighter than others (8 is my cut-off).

As others have pointed out, Razz, much like the other Stud variants, is (to me. anyway) a game of patience. Ya gotta pick your hands and you may have to wait a LONG time for a playable hand.

Aggression has its place, but is really a matter of timing. I prefer to let the others get "jiggy" with the betting when I think I may have a hand until I'm confident that I probably have a "winnah". It also gives me more time to get a read (as much as you can, online) on the other players.

You also need to pay attention. One of the beauties of Stud games is that, unlike Holdem and Omaha, you get to see a lot of cards. You need to hone your observational skills and get a quick read of "outs and doubts". Keeping a rough count of big cards -vs- small cards is invaluable. As JD pointed out, A23 is nowhere near as valuable when there are a bunch of 4s through 7s showing as it is when there are 9s through paint all over the place.

Finally, as others have pointed out, online is funky, especially in the freerolls. You really are playing against a donkfest.