Sklansky on slowplaying in The Theory of Poker

[Bill Samuels]

I'm perplexed by the chapter on slowplaying in the Theory of Poker by
David Sklansky. He says you should slowplay with a hand which is excellent
but still can be beaten but not with the pure nuts, with which you should
raise in case someone else has a good hand. How can this possibly be the
case?

He gives an example of a lowball hand where a player has a pat 7-4 in
middle position and suggests that they call an early raise to allow more
players in for the draw and then stand pat (of course) allowing other
players to bet then draw. However he says that if a player has a wheel
(5-4-3-2-A), then they should reraise in middle position in the same
circumstance to isolate the original raiser "in the hope that he has a
monster".

Perhaps I misunderstood or this is due to my inexperience in lowball, but
surely when you have the nuts you want to allow more people in the pot
because they cannot draw out on you, but when you have an excellent but
beatable hand you want to stop people from drawing out on you, as well as
in this case because you stood pat you clearly have an excellent hand so
players are not going to bet into you unless they also have an excellent
hand (or believe you to be bluffing which is unlikely). Any play where you
allow other players to cheaply draw to hands that beat you and then they
will only bet into you if you are beaten can surely not be a recommended
play? You will either win a small pot or lose a large pot.

What am I missing?

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com

[wamplerr]

I don't know a whole lot about lowball either, but:

Consider, there are only two betting rounds. So if the early raiser is
betting say a one card draw, and you just call him, and then you stand
pat, and he catches bad, you get no action after the draw for your nut
hand (from him). You might get a caller or two behind you, but they're
in the same situation, they aren't going to give you action if they
catch bad. So you jam it before the draw, hope they have a pat 6 or
they make a 6, but if they don't, you still made a good pot out of it.

I don't know about the slowplaying the 7 low.

** Posted via RGP ACCESS at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com

** $100 Deposit Bonus at http://www.FabulousPoker.com

[7stud]

I think his point is that when you're in middle position with a 7 low, and
you're facing a raise from your right, the slim possibility that you are
beaten by the raiser and the possibility that just calling will induce other
players to call, dictates a slow play call. But, if you have the nuts, and
you are facing that same raise, he suggests that you raise in the hopes you
will get re-raised. "The other players will probably fold, but you might
beat the original player out of many bets before he discovers you have the
nuts."

I think he's trying to show the flip side of slowplaying with the nuts: you
may be able to win more bets by not slowplaying. However, he does
emphatically say this: "With the pure nuts you should bet and raise
immediately in case someone else has a strong hand too." I don't really
understand his advice to bet with the nuts because then you don't know if
someone has a hand or not, so you may drive everyone out. When facing a
raise while holding the nuts, it looks like you might have someone already
hooked, so then it makes more sense to get aggressive.

Maybe in the long run he believes you will win more bets with the nuts by
betting it aggressively because of those times someone else has a second
best hand.

"Bill Samuels" <anonymous@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3f463cd8$0$17680$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
> I'm perplexed by the chapter on slowplaying in the Theory of Poker by
> David Sklansky. He says you should slowplay with a hand which is excellent
> but still can be beaten but not with the pure nuts, with which you should
> raise in case someone else has a good hand. How can this possibly be the
> case?
>
> He gives an example of a lowball hand where a player has a pat 7-4 in
> middle position and suggests that they call an early raise to allow more
> players in for the draw and then stand pat (of course) allowing other
> players to bet then draw. However he says that if a player has a wheel
> (5-4-3-2-A), then they should reraise in middle position in the same
> circumstance to isolate the original raiser "in the hope that he has a
> monster".
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood or this is due to my inexperience in lowball, but
> surely when you have the nuts you want to allow more people in the pot
> because they cannot draw out on you, but when you have an excellent but
> beatable hand you want to stop people from drawing out on you, as well as
> in this case because you stood pat you clearly have an excellent hand so
> players are not going to bet into you unless they also have an excellent
> hand (or believe you to be bluffing which is unlikely). Any play where you
> allow other players to cheaply draw to hands that beat you and then they
> will only bet into you if you are beaten can surely not be a recommended
> play? You will either win a small pot or lose a large pot.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
>
>

[JonCooke]

"Bill Samuels" <anonymous@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<3f463cd8$0$17680$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>...
> I'm perplexed by the chapter on slowplaying in the Theory of Poker by
> David Sklansky. He says you should slowplay with a hand which is excellent
> but still can be beaten but not with the pure nuts, with which you should
> raise in case someone else has a good hand. How can this possibly be the
> case?
>
> He gives an example of a lowball hand where a player has a pat 7-4 in
> middle position and suggests that they call an early raise to allow more
> players in for the draw and then stand pat (of course) allowing other
> players to bet then draw. However he says that if a player has a wheel
> (5-4-3-2-A), then they should reraise in middle position in the same
> circumstance to isolate the original raiser "in the hope that he has a
> monster".
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood or this is due to my inexperience in lowball, but
> surely when you have the nuts you want to allow more people in the pot
> because they cannot draw out on you:
> but when you have an excellent but
> beatable hand you want to stop people from drawing out on you, as well as
> in this case because you stood pat you clearly have an excellent hand so
> players are not going to bet into you unless they also have an excellent
> hand (or believe you to be bluffing which is unlikely). Any play where you
> allow other players to cheaply draw to hands that beat you and then they
> will only bet into you if you are beaten can surely not be a recommended
> play? You will either win a small pot or lose a large pot.
>
> What am I missing?

The 7 low is worth maybe 2-3 bets against opponents drawing.
The 5 low is worth infinite bets against players with monsters.

His suggestion is that the slow play will make you a little extra
money - a bet here or there from another caller, but the raise may
make you lots of extra bets if you get into a raising war with another
player. Obvioulsy the 7 can't get into a raising war, cos it will lose
to a six, so the slow play is proper.

[Dsklansky]

Obviously this advice is not set in stone. It could be correct to slowplay the
nuts. The important thing is to understand that it is less likely to be correct
than to slowplay slighlty worse hands.

[JonCooke]

dsklansky@aol.com (Dsklansky) wrote in message news:<20030822223904.07151.00000495@mb-m25.aol.com>...
> Obviously this advice is not set in stone. It could be correct to slowplay the
> nuts. The important thing is to understand that it is less likely to be correct
> than to slowplay slighlty worse hands.

If I may elaborate?
If calling will bring along many more players then that would be
appropriate.
If calling would bring along maybe only one extra player, and if the
raiser was very aggressive, raising with the nuts would be better.

[Travel]

The benefit of slow playing is to let your opponents raise -for- you,
when you have an unusually strong hand.

A hand that out classes the situation and you know is the winning hand.

Disguise the strength of -your- hand and let -them- build the pot.

[JonCooke]

Perhaps a clearer example of the concept he is expressing comes from
Pot-limit omaha.

If you flop the nut straight with no improving cards, you should
genreally check the hand on the flop, hoping to get a call later from
someone who wouldn't play if they knew the strength of your hand.

If you flop the nut straight with a bunch of redraws to better hands,
you should bet and hope to get raised by the nut straight so that you
can create a huge pot.