5card draw strategy wanted.

Yeah +1

+2

Hi, melkein,
I've moved this to the "Other Poker Variants" board.
[Edit: I just realized that this is your first post. Welcome to PokerStrategy.com! ]

I too would like more advanced strategies. You three have probably already take some of my money at the higher limits. ♠_cry:
I do OK at FL $0.10/$0.20 and I built my bankroll on FL $0.25/$0.50 but it seems that even at FL $0.25/$0.50 the games are much tougher lately.

However I don't think that such strategies are really possible. Beyond FL $0.25/$0.50, it is all about knowing the player.

Once you know the relative strength of each hand, and how many combos beat it, then you can bet and raise by the odds of winning -- many players cannot even do that.

I have noticed others doing the following:
 limp (or call) and draw 2 then check/call post-draw showing trips. They leave money on the table pre-draw to get an extra bet post-draw. I also think that they do this to balance the times they draw 1 with trips, and the times they keep a kicker with their pair.
 limp / raise with a pat hand. I'm not sure I like this one. It is a bit obvious. It might worth trying with air though ♠_biggrin:
 3Betting from BB with straight or flush draws vs BU and SB steals
 3Betting post-draw as a bluff. I'm not sure that this is an "advanced strategy" or just plain spewing. However if you know someone is bluffy post-draw it can work.

You probably do all those anyway ♦

For myself, table selection and notes are the way to go.
There are players I do NOT want on my left, and players I don't want on my right -- and if they sit there, I just leave.

There are other things I've heard of but don't do, and I can't tell if I've seen them -- things such as breaking pat full houses. I can see this if you have a table full of people who call raises with pairs a lot.

Speaking of pats, I assume you snow a certain amount?
If you catch someone snowing, I assume you make notes?

It would be really great to get a 5-Card Draw group together.
To me this game is the essence of poker, but if poker is "a game of insufficient information" then 5-Card Draw has about the smallest amount of information there can be.

Do you use a HUD? If so, which one?

All the best,
VS

I wrote a chapter on 5CD in our book. Not sure whether it counts as advanced or not.

Hi, jb,
That chapter pretty much got me to where I am now.
You can pretty much tell who at the table is over valuing and undervaluing their hands.

Where the chapter leaves off is "What to do about the players that already know all that?"
It takes several hands before you realize that the guy raising 50% from the button isn't a spewtard -- he's exploiting you.

To me that is what advanced strategy means. I now have situations where I bluff, and situations where I slowplay, but that is not quite enough. I see 3Bet bluffs post-draw from players winning 3BB/100 over several hundred hands. I haven't yet got the jam to try that -- I need a specific player to try it on.

When does "advanced strategy" become "fancy play syndrome"?
If you stick to playing pot odds, you would win long term -- would you not?

Cheers,
VS

If you mean by advanced strategy everything that hasn't been specifically addressed for fixed limit draw that's written up or put in videos in an organized way, there may be a plethora of topics; here's most of them:

0) common errors, basic strategic ideas and identifying an opponent's weaknesses;
1) table dynamics, timing (tells) and psychology ( esp. understanding how opponents think );
2) hand reading, range approximation and adjustments;
3) working out balanced strategies using ideas from MOP ( Chen & Ankenman );
4) exploiting specific opponents and playing against opponents that use exploitive play;
5) tracking software and note taking;
6) adjustments for PL, NL and MTTs ( esp. with large antes = 0.5 x SB )

I can help most in 1), 2) and 3) and anything concerning theoretical foundations or game theory ( some of 6) ).

VorpalF2F: BTW, how can I send you a PM or get in touch with you ?

The first 'Super System' book, edited/supervised by the great Doyle Brunson, has a section on draw poker.

Hi, Glopslart,
Is that the section by Mike Caro?

If so, it is a very interesting read, because it assumes Jokers in the game as wild cards.

If I remember right, it also is based on antes, rather than blinds.

When I was first playing the game, we usually played it with deuces wild, and antes.

The antes make it worthwhile to enter more pots. Quite a different game.
I'd like to see a fixed limit (or pot limit) ante game online.

VS

Originally posted by bigpooch
VorpalF2F: BTW, how can I send you a PM or get in touch with you ?

I'm not sure.
I've sent you a friend request. I know basic level can't send friend requests, but perhaps you can accept them.

VS

Many of the Poker Stars 5cd MTTs have a big ante: ante = (1/2)xSB for each player. This calls for adjustments for opening hands to much looser standards than what many cash game regulars are used to. An interesting question is what to do when a player limps and you are in the SB; another one: when everyone folds to you in the SB.

Okay, I'll share a hand I witnessed at FL 10-20 several years ago; I can't even remember if I was at the table or not, but if not, I was able to deduce the BTN's hand based on his actions. Anyway, I discussed this hand with one of the draw players at this forum recently, but here I'll keep the participants anonymous ( maybe only temporarily ).

FL $10-20 5cd: 5- or 6-handed ( if I was at the table, then almost certainly 6! ) and the action is folded to the BTN who open raises for $20 and the SB 3-bets to $30 which is called only by the BTN, so it's now HU with a pot of ~$68 ( can't remember the rake back then ). Both players draw three and the SB bets, the BTN raises and the SB 3-bets and now the BTN thinks for awhile and calls. The SB shows a pair of THREEs unimproved and the BTN mucks.

I suppose this is one of the most memorable hands where "advanced play" somehow was involved, although technically speaking some really advanced players might argue that the BTN could have 4-bet bluff on the river or simply folded to the 3-bet given that his calling range was too weak. Some other players might think this was too much FPS = "fancy play syndrom" that some regulars get into a bad habit of incorporating in their play.

Thoughts?

I'll give you my thoughts and synopsis after some of you have pondered this for awhile.

Not exactly the same, since we're both in the blinds.
This is a bit of a stretch for me BvB, but villain is active and aggro, so I thought I'd have a go.

I'm guessing he is open-raising any pair or better in SB.
If I D3, I'm repping JJxxx + so I thought I'd D1.

Since I normally don't defend nearly this wide, and I don't 3Bet nearly often enough I thought it had credibility.

Cows play poker with cow chips
PokerStars Limit 5 Card Draw $0.10/$0.20 - 5 players

CO: $3.18
Button: $3.01
SB: $3.89
BB: $3.03 (Hero)
UTG: $1.14

Dealing Hands: ($0.15) 7♥: 5♥: 8♠: Q♦: 7♦: (5 players)
3 folds, SB raises to $0.20, Hero raises to $0.30, SB calls $0.10

First Draw: ($0.60) (2 players)
SB discards 3, Hero discards 1,
7♥: 8♠: Q♦: 7♦: || 5♦:
SB checks, Hero bets $0.20, SB folds
Hero collected $0.57

So in the hand above where SB 3Bets an unimproved pair of threes I think that SB needs to rep a better hand than a pair, especially since he has to play first post-draw.
If SB 3Bets pre vs BTN, he is repping KK+ ? if he draws 3.
So BTN needs to rep bigger -- Can he D2 or even D1 here? and give his post-draw 3Bet some weight?

Anyway it is out of my league. Unless SB and BB both fold way to often, I'm folding 22xxx pre.
"Opening wide on the BTN" to me is 88-99

Cheers,
VS

Similar hand today:

v1.27Converting hands till the cows come home
PokerStars Limit 5 Card Draw $10/$20 - 3 players

SB: $290.39
BB: $462.91
Button: $362.90

Dealing Hands: ($15.00) (3 players)
Button raises to $20, SB raises to $30, BB folds, Button raises to $40, SB calls $10

First Draw: ($90.00) (2 players)
SB discards 3, Button discards 1, SB checks, Button bets $20, SB calls $20

SB showed 9♠: 2♥: 7♠: 7♥: J♦:, a pair of Sevens
Button showed 2♣: 2♦: K♣: Q♣: 5♣:, a pair of Deuces
SB won $128
(Rake: $2)

So SB thinks BTN is opening light, so raises.
When BTN caps, he has to put in an additional 1/2 BB into a pot of 4 BB so he is getting 8:1 -- pretty much must call.

Post draw, BTN MUST bet -- he takes the pot no other way, and he needs to do this so he gets paid when his draw hit.
SB MUST call -- the pot is now 5.5 big bets, and he needs to be ahead only 1 in 6 to break even.

In this case, BTN DID rep better than a pair, but it got him no further than if he had started with the deuces.

Is SB better off check/raising post-draw as a bluff vs D1?
If BTN has a small 2pr would he not be more-or-less forced to fold it?

Now I see why > FL $1/$2 scares the crap out of me ♠_cry:
VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
So SB thinks BTN is opening light, so raises.
When BTN caps, he has to put in an additional 1/2 BB into a pot of 4 BB so he is getting 8:1 -- pretty much must call.

With a pair, yes, SB should call; however, if he had initially decided to 3-bet with AK, he should probably fold unless he is planning to CR bluff postdraw and that would depend on whether he held good hand features with his AK: e.g., if he was suited and held a few other high cards a CR bluff postdraw may have a better chance to succeed compared to some other AK hands. Recent history and table dynamics would probably be an important factor as well as future EV.

Post draw, BTN MUST bet -- he takes the pot no other way, and he needs to do this so he gets paid when his draw hit.

This is pretty much an autobet unless he had paired on precisely the K; with the Q, it's debatable and depends on the SB's range when he draws 3 cards in this spot --- if it's nearly impossible for the SB to have less than KK, then the BTN should bluff with QQK52 and obviously anything weaker.

SB MUST call -- the pot is now 5.5 big bets, and he needs to be ahead only 1 in 6 to break even.

Not quite a MUST call. Before the SB calls the 4-bet, he should already be prepared to think about what he will do postdraw; e.g., if he believes the BTN had a legitimate 4-betting hand, he should only call+ by improving to two pairs or better. OTOH, in this situation, it is clear that the SB strongly believed that the BTN was on a semibluff: specific hand features may have swayed his decision: e.g., if he initially held 77 without diamonds and clubs and without an A or a K, he might think the BTN was semibluffing with a flush draw ( or opening with AK initially ). If he now had caught at least a diamond and a club postdraw, this would now decrease the number of combinations of possible flush draws the BTN holds; in the actual draw, he received the Jd, 9s and 2h, so just based on the suit distribution ( say he didn't see a single club, so that makes it now slightly more likely the BTN has a club draw ) and his initial belief ( due to either "table feel" or actual hand texture ), he ought to call. The worst draw without improving will look something like the Kd and Ac; then, the SB can think about folding. Thus, the SB can use game theory to base his decision: I guess the pot was $87.75 just before drawing cards, so the SB must call+ ( includes legit check raising ) with a frequency of about ~87.75/107.75 or about 0.81438515 of the time when he has drawn 3 cards. If he decides to use game theory for his range, then unimproved 77 will unlikely fall into the top 81.44% of his postdraw range in this precise situation; however, he can use game theory for this specific hand, i.e., 77 and then decide in advance something like: if I either don't see a club or diamond, I'm calling unimproved ( if he intially held 77 with spades and hearts ); if I see an A and a K with a diamond a club, I'm folding; everything else, I'll think about if I get there. He needs to call with about 0.7396189 of his unimproved combinations or ~8549 of his 11559 combinations when he doesn't improve to be unexploitable. If he's been in this situation before, then he may have worked out the mathematics in advance already so his decision is systemic ( simply based on the specific cards he receives postdraw ) and not merely based on "seat of the pants" intuition.

In this case, BTN DID rep better than a pair, but it got him no further than if he had started with the deuces.

Is SB better off check/raising post-draw as a bluff vs D1?
If BTN has a small 2pr would he not be more-or-less forced to fold it?

Now I see why > FL $1/$2 scares the crap out of me ♠_cry:
VS

Actually, the BTN may have discarded an A, so in that case, his 4-bet was pretty automatic too, just in case the SB had a weak two pairs; even if the SB has AA-QQ, it's a bit less likely for the SB to improve. He could have also just called and then bet postdraw if the SB now draws three; however, it's not obviously clear that the SB would have drawn 3 if the BTN doesn't 4-bet predraw; the SB could have started with 7s-up and decided to break off two pairs.

The problem is that the SB may get blown off by a 3-bet bluff if he decides to CR bluff; it's ok to CR with the intention of 4-bet bluffing, but I don't think this is what the SB would do. The kind of hand to CR 4-bet bluff could be something like an AK suited that failed to materialize and had a lot of high cards with extreme suit texture or some rare unimproved one pair hands with high cards.

The BTN should fold his worst legitimate betting hands, such as some A-high flush draws that paired on aces and some of his worst two pair hands. He's not really forced to fold all small two pairs unless he systemically decides to always fold them. Again, he can use game theory for the specific hand in question rather than his range if the hand texture or table dynamics were important in his judgment.

Semibluffing is part of the game, so some of the hand range details have to be worked out in advance before playing so as to not give away anything at the table ( such as timing tells ).

Dear Vorpal,

Please sort out some bigpooch 5CD videos and strategy articles for Pokerstrategy.

Love,

JB

Okay, here are ideas that are useful against players that limp in with just a pair. [ DIGRESSION: I suppose one should almost never open limp with a pair at a "normal table". There are two kinds of one pair hands that I can think of to open limp in with at FL 5 card draw: 1) outside of the blinds, a flexible one pair hand that is in and of itself almost good enough to open raise but is also either a 15-out or 12-out straight flush draw; a long time ago, I remember even open limping on the BTN with a 9876 15-out straight flush draw with 99 ( but now I think it's simply best to always open raise from the BTN ); and 2) a pair of 22 from the SB with highest kicker a K and next highest a T or lower; I'd like to open raise from the SB with 22KTx against the BB at the usual ante structure, but if I get called, I'd guess it may be best to draw four to the K except with a four-flush, it's better to draw one to the flush ( NOTE: with 22KJx, I'd open and if called, draw three to the KJ; again, it may be better to just open limp against some opponents in the BB and draw to 22 ). ]

Usually, the more experienced regulars know not to open limp with one pair or two pairs, but often, especially at stakes under $1-2, you see players open limping with: UTG ) KK and sometimes QQ; HIJ) QQ; CUT) JJ and sometimes TT; BTN) TT/99/88; also, sometimes players open limp with even weaker pairs.

Suppose you are in the BB and are pretty sure of the opener's pair: say, the UTG open limps and you've never seen him open limp with anything other than KK. How might you take advantage of that knowledge?

Even though the pot's quite small, it's not small enough for your opponent to fold to a bet postdraw whenever he doesn't improve: even at $0.25-$0.5, the pot is $0.57 so he has to call+ 57/107~ 0.5327103 of the time to not be exploited; at $2-4, it's 4.85/8.85 ~ 0.5480226 of the time. Normally, if he takes the top of his range, it will be not just KKA+ he calls with, but KKQJ, KKQT and at least some KKQ9 hands and even KKQ8 sometimes, depending on the size of the pot. Recall that the probability of improving one pair to two pairs or better ( assuming no card removal effects ) is 4656/16215 ~ 0.2871.

If you have been lucky enough to have seen the other two kings such as when you start with 22Kxy and catch another K, it is imperative that you bluff here. You should also bluff if you happen to have KK at the start and end up with very weak side kickers, you should also bet out; however, if you have at least ~KKJ, you should hope that the high kicker you caught is good enough to win the pot versus the other KK hand.

If you've seen both kings, it makes sense to value bet ANY two pairs, even 3322K because you often gain a bet when the other player just has KKA. On the other hand, QQJJA postdraw is usually not worth betting except against a calling station. Obviously, if you catch KK22+ you make a value bet.

If your opponent could have a wide range of one pair hands, such as on the BTN, you need to normally value bet any two pairs or better that can beat some of the limper's worst two pair hands. For example, at $2-4, the bet postdraw is $4 but you only gain $3.76 because of the 3% rake if you get called by worse, so you need to be in the top 0.94/1.94 of the calling+ range of the limper. Since the GTC+F ( game theory call+ frequency ) f = 4.85/8.85 in this case, and assuming the limper's improvement chances are p ~ 4656/16215, the limper should call with a frequency of (f-p)/(1-p) when unimproved or ~ 0.365964741. If it weren't for card removal effects, exactly the top 1/4 would be when the limper catches the best side kicker ( the ace). Out of the limper's calling+ hands, to be in the top 3.76/7.76 of these will exclude roughly the bottom ~13.51551% of the two pair hands the limper ends up with; for $0.25-$0.50, it turns out to be almost the bottom 20% of two pair hands the limper ends up making. Card removal effects are useful to think about: if the BTN has 88/99/TT and you started with 99A83 and end up with 99228, you probably can't value bet because it's just too unlikely your opponent has either 88 or 99 to begin with ( predraw, there are 11559 combinations of 99 and 60189 of TT out of the remaining C(47,5) combinations that exclude your cards ) and that ace takes away some potential TTA calling combinations.

Wow -- thanks for that!
It is going to take me a while to digest.

Best wishes for a peaceful, prosperous 2015,
VS

Here's a simple scheme for some AA hands and AK suited I've already worked out that one can try against a fairly aggressive cutoff when on the BTN:

On the BTN: after CUTOFF open raises, 3-bet with AA without any cards in the J-K range. For the bluffing range, 3-bet with AK suited as long as it's "pure", i.e., there is no third card of the same suit at the AK, no Q/J/T; also, the subtle requirement is that the AKsuited hand can't have all the side kickers in only one other suit.

Then, if the CUTOFF has drawn three and checked, you value bet AAK+ together with bluffing hands that are TT or worse ( those come from the AK suited combinations that fail to materialize to JJ+ ). If you use this scheme, you will be bluffing close to optimally in this situation.