Stud Hi 101

  • Other
  • Other
  • other gametypes
(46 Votes) 10999


Free membership

Join now


In his first Stud Hi strategy video RainmanTrail focuses on playing style, starting hands, game selection and does an in-depth analysis of bankroll management.


hand history review Stud Hi 101 Theory Video

Comments (48)

newest first
  • CBFunk


  • MITStudent


    i will :)
  • fashionist


  • kafelnikow


    thank you. good video. hope for more :)
  • Dippy19


    Nice video.

    I have a question about the AQJ hand. Wouldn't it make more sens to raise or fold there? If you fold you obviously don't have a problem. If you raise it's unlikely that one of the K will reraise you, since two of them are showing so in most cases non of them has a par of kings, and you also have an A blocker for the A behind you, and if he reraises you you pretty much know where you stand. So by raiseing you basically make your high card value live by forcing out other high cards and you get info if you get reraised.
    And also I don't understand the point of limping, since if you get raised when you limp it's not necessary that one of the K or the A has a pair and if you hit a pair of Q or J you don't really know where you are at. On top of that with 2xK and one T out your straight is pretty much dead.
  • prometheus42


    57:00 I can't see how we can ever call here vs open 3oak and a paired door raising. He announces at least to have 333 beat. Also our reverse implied odds are huge.
  • prometheus42


    1:00:00 I agree with Dippy19 here. In addition to that not having a live 2flush and the dead A hurts us quite a bit. I'd like a fold here best.

    @Dippy19: It's actually more likely that somebody has split Kings when there are two of them out then if only one of them is showing.
  • prometheus42


    1:05:30 I actually think it is quite likely we have the best hand, because better pairs (in the hole) like 99-AA would raise most of the time.
  • geezer77


    ждем перевод
  • prometheus42


    1:11:20 What are your plans for the hand if you don't improve on 4th?

    Btw., great to see the increased coverage of Stud here. Hope you cover more advanced stuff soon. Keep up the good work.
  • TheCoon


    Great video!
    I really liked the math/theory behind BR managment.
    Looking forward to your next video :)
  • RainmanTrail


    RE: AQJ hand. I think folding this hand in this spot is absolutely fine. As pointed out, most of our strength has been taken away by the dead cards. However, raising here is pretty bad. We wouldn't even raise split Jacks in this spot because of the K,A,K behind us. When there are two kings behind us, the likelihood that at least one of them is paired is higher than if there is only one K behind us. Folding here is fine. Limping is also ok, but you have to be a pretty good player to make it a profitable limp (ie - know when to get away from good hands and know when you can steal pots from weaker opponents). If you limp and the King completes and Ace reraises, you can easily move off your investment. If you raise and one of them reraises, now you are 2 BB deep if you call. That's a spot you don't want to be in.
  • wahnfried


    very nice video, i would like to see more of these
  • RainmanTrail


    RE: Prometheus
  • RainmanTrail


    ugg... I just wrote a long answer and it got truncated. I'll try again.

    RE: 57:00. I went with my read here that the 333 only had 333 and not a full house at this point. The 5 pairing didn't scare me at all, I was fairly certain that he just had a straight draw and was trying to get his hand HU against the 333s all in bet.

    The real question is whether or not wee had the pot odds to draw at a Q or J given our opponents don't improve. The answer is probably no, I didn't calculate it though. I would guess it's pretty close. I can calculate it for you if you'd like to see the math on it.
  • liljaybe86


    awesome video :)
  • RainmanTrail


    Adding to that...

    Remember that on 6th street, the 333 was all in for less than half a big bet. It's a no brainer to call here if we are only up against the all in's bet. If we then look at the 5845 as a side pot, I would snap call this player with something as weak as Queens up. I didn't give him much credit at all. In retrospect, I like our call much better than a fold.
  • taschendamenfalter


    very good job - e.g. never really thought about the consequences cause of the different ante/bring-in structures
  • spitfireee


  • hackbinder


    looking forward to the next stud video
  • muebarek


    since i'm relatively new to the game, i like the methodical "step by step" approach of your videos. the math behind the BRM was well explained as well. keep up the good work!
  • CountZero


    great Video!!!
  • DonTabamsey


    very nice vid!
    7:20 how do you get the formula for ror?
    if you have from first hitting time of brownian motion with respect to a boundary at zero then i would to ask you how good of an approximation the assumption of normal distribution is.
    secondly, i would like to know if it would a better idea to calculate the risk of having to go down a limit instead of this risk of ruin.
  • opidlx


    very good video i´ve enjoyed every minute. im looking forward to more stud hi videos. 102 or 201 i don´t care ;)
  • jbpatzer


    Liked the video very much.

    Some constructive criticism on the maths, speaking as someone who has to explain this stuff for a living, you gave too much detail for someone who knows very little maths, and too little for someone who knows enough to understand it. Where does the formula you rearrange come from? A normal distribution presumably. This is the hard bit, not the rearranging the equation stuff. The risk of ruin analysis is interesting, but doesn't take into account the ability to move up and down levels. Don't you have to include some sort of analysis of Kelly betting?

    Looking forward to the next Razz video.
  • prometheus42


    RE: Rainman

    I was curious and attempted a calculation myself:
    We get 1:10.85 to call 6th, that means we need 8.44% equity to break even.
    If we run our hand against two random pairs of holecards in PPT we end up with 9.64% equity. We fare even better when against a straightdraw (A2, 23, 36, 37, 69, 79) and trips with 11%. But these straightdraws are quite unlikely: two 9s, three 3s and an A are dead. Also all these draws are very weak gutshots, I mean how braindead do you have to be to isolate yourself with that kind of a hand against trips? We are also showing four to a straight... This makes me think his range is heavily weighted towards big hands, ie *5, 45, 44, 67. Note that these cards are completely live.
    So if we run PPT again vs [**] and [*5] we get 7.26%, vs [**] and [44, 45, *5, 67] it's 7.02%. When we throw all the draws in there [A2, 23, 36, 69, 79, 45, 44, 67, *5] we have 8.24%.
    So you're right, it's pretty close, but it seems to be -EV.

    Does this look about right? What do you think?

    Glad to see you employ an analytical, math-based approach to the game. Hope to learn a lot.
  • RainmanTrail


    RE: DonTabamsey
  • RainmanTrail


    ugg... my comments always get cut off...

    Part 1 of 2:

    RE: DonTabamsey
  • RainmanTrail


    Third times a charm

    I stole the ROR formula from a friend of mine (another math nerd). I do assume Normal Distribution of data. I've read some arguments against using Normal Distribution with regard to aspects of poker, but I can't seem to lend those theories much credit. Afterall, that's what the central limit theorem is all about. (well, somewhat).
  • RainmanTrail


    I do however think there is more merit to the idea of risk calculations incorporating the dropping down of stakes. It's certainly an idea worth entertaining.
  • RainmanTrail


    RE: Prometheus
    I like your analysis. Thanks for breaking this hand down. I figured it would be really close. Your analysis confirms my intuition. When I was playing the hand, I remember thinking to myself that the guy with the 5845 had to have a straight draw or two pairs (5s and 4s specifically, NOT 8855). The way he played the hand was really weak no matter what he had. A straight draw on 4th street for him is the only hand that makes sense for him to call on 4th. But as we all know, players don't make much sense at these limits to begin with. Perhaps we are giving him too much credit to begin with.
  • RainmanTrail


    I agree with your constructive criticism. I just wanted people to somewhat understand why there is no set answer for the far too commonly asked question of "How big should my bankroll be?" Perhaps I should dedicate an entire video to Bankroll sizing and ROR. That probably would have made more sense. I apologize for leaving the mathematically literate in the dark on the ROR formula I used. The Kelly betting approach is often debated with regard to bankroll sizing. Though I do find it relevant. Also, yes, the formula I use assumes a Normal Dist.
  • alenstrat


    Thanks so much. Amazing explanations to everything, I'd risk saying your videos are the best every on Pokerstrategy. Love the mathematical stuff, finally a clear explanation of why we do all these things as robots.
  • duchart


    it let me watch the first 4 min and then froze.
  • duchart


    never mind i thought i had sorted videos that only i could watch... looks like this is going to be a good beginners video to watch when i am a silver member. i hope my bonus points start coming in soon.
  • goodfellow


    coll vid
  • fu4711


    Regarding moving down stakes (which most of us do before going broke):

    In this model you can simply split your roll for the calculation. Just leave aside the amount you plan to step down at and image the rest as the roll you take a shot at a higher limit with. All you want to know is how high the risk is to go broke with that roll.
    If you also take into account that winrates normally are lower on a higher limit, you might get surprised by the numbers you get for ROR.
    The shots many people take are almost bound to fail (take the SD of PLO into account and you quit poker, for sure).
  • ozwakyambi


    liked the math, great video
  • IcMean


    Wow. This vid is awesome, I had been looking forward to it and I love it :D Cant wait for the next one to come.
  • Niklema


    That's awesome.Excellent stud-video with most valuable aspects in stud game.Thank you,very much!
    Can't wait for your new video)
  • ulmo


    Excellent video, like all of them you did! I am really looking forward to watching your next vid!
  • ittapiros


    This is an awesome video!
    It really helped me to play profitable on low stake stud hi!
  • RainmanTrail


    Thanks again everyone, I'm glad you all are enjoying my videos.
  • IPE889


    Very detailed and clear video
    Thank you
  • DustyMonk


    Great video, waiting for the next. The room I play only has Stud Hi.
    Would you check more on lower limts where you almost never see a raise, only checks, bets and calls? Check to see where you're at that is.
  • Spockomatic


    Great video, keep up the good work!
  • taavi1337


    very nice
  • niknik88


    Are there going to come more 7card stud vids?