blonde poker forum

Hey everybody!

Basically, I've decided that I want to try my hand at some dealers choice games, and work my way up to playing the big DC games that seem to be fairly regularly occurring. I'm a reasonably experienced standard 7 card stud player, a pretty experienced omaha player, and a pretty experienced lowball player (but not specifically padooki, which im told is significantly different from Badugi). I know the basic rules of every game played, but have noticed in my attempts to play that I am pretty lacking in the knowledge of starting hands etc. My game of choice on the btn is padooki, since I feel my strongest edge is in lowball draw games and the greatest positional advantage comes in this game.

Basically, has anybody got any helpful tips/advanced strategy information to help me develop a stronger DC game? Thanks!

The DC games that I see played include:

Super Stud
7 card stud
7 card stud hi-lo
Omaha 4-5-6
Omaha 4-5-6 hi-lo
Texas Hold-em
Irish
Pineapple
Padooki

I always choose a draw game on my button too, definitely the biggest positional edge of the mixed games, followed  closely by 6 card PLO8.

If someone chooses plo8 6 card and I'm in the SB (playing deep), I'm folding virtually all hands bar AA23 / AA34 type hands. This game you need to be getting money in with nuts+redraws+nut low draws/redraws, being out of position makes this hard to get money in well.  Conversely play many hands in the cutoff and the button.  Be careful of being set over setted, this can seem pretty common when playing 6O.

Novice players make most mistakes in superstud, its literally amazing the times you see people getting their money in on 5th street heads up with just a set and no low draw, when their opponent already has the low locked up subsequently has them free-rolled.  Despite this, I still think picking this game on your button is a waste of positional advantage, since stud position changes due to up cards strength.

I much prefer badugi to padooki, since in badugi, you can have A23 rainbow and still draw on the 3rd draw, knowing that if you miss you still will prob have the best hand (a made 3 card badugi). Whereas in padooki, you'll often be better to pat a smallish flush, rather than risk catching a big card on the third draw. Its only a small difference but logically the game of badugi sits much better with me.  Wish places in the UK would start spreading Baduci and Badaci split pot games, but I think they can only really work as fixed limit.

If you are a decent stud player, youll know the nuances of the Stud/Stud Hi Lo games, but in my experience, no-one hardly ever picks these games as they are so "starting hand dependant".  People always pick SuperStud instead.

Would be interested to hear any tips on "Maltese Cross" and "Joker Poker" if anyone has any insight.  People pick this a lot in Stoke, and I can't really see any ways to play it optimally.

This thread has gone well :p

Sweetman, I've never actually heard of either of those variants of the game, could you explain them for me?

Baduci, I think, is a triple draw game where the pot is split between the best 2-7 hand and the best Badugi. Think aces are high.

You can't therefore have the nuts both ways, but that doesn't mean you can't win both pots, obv.

Badaci has aces being low ("Bad Ace-y", geddit?)


I'm sure much better qualified answers will come shortly.

You need to learn 4o, 6 h/l, super stud and padooki above ALL else. These are #1 priority (for the DTD games anyway). The only other game you'll play is Irish and thats when Berridge in playing.

Literally, forget about stud and stud h/l and definitely forget pineapple. You will NEVER EVER EVER see anyone pick Hold'em, and if you pick it, they'll eat your face. If you do fancy it though, there isnt a paddle for it at DTD, but if you turn the paddle upside down and call out Hold'em, You'll be in the upper echelons of the DTD DC game as probably <5% know that you can do it ;)

Message honeybadger and point him to the topic, ideally post something that will challenge him, and he'll take the bait imo.

Lildave and I discussed the merits of 4/5/6 Omaha and what gives the biggest positional advantage, thoughts from the topic? He gave a convincing argument for 4, made a lot of sense, I feel like Omaha 8 should be the same but its hard to know.

Yeah, I'm kinda hoping that stu and dave notice this and come out with some ridic wisdom, as they tend to :p I'm only just starting to feel like I'm appreciating the intricacies of being a winning Omaha player, literally really as of yesterday, and I've found myself filled with a renewed enthusiasm for poker in general, as if I'm on the brink of a massive epiphany :)

Stu likes superstud, just sayin'

And padooki, if the rumours are to be believed ;) Although not Irish... Definitely not Irish. #notsurewhetherracist ;)

I would prefer to call maximum PLO8 (4/5/6) when on button over padooki. Feel people overplay low hands in PLO8 and often shovel money in when most of it won't come back thru' being 1/4rd etc.

Is the DtD game still mostly 5/5? If theres a regular 2/2  going might come down more often.

As an aside re: Hold 'em, at Notts Gala many years ago a drunk wealthy guy sat in on the DC game but only wanted to play Texas (the game on the telly he called it). We played PLHE for about two hours he played every hand until his money eventually ran out :)

Yes and more importantly, the nuts can be achieved both ways with A2345 being the badaci version of 23457

What is a fair sit down at a 2/2 game for a player who knows probably half of the games but not very well! would defo be interested but dont want to lose chunks early on!

FYP

I am happy to discuss DC games with you Matt, but privately not on this thread. I can teach you the basics of all the main games. After that you've got to play lots to get a more nuanced understanding (and perhaps then I can help you further if you are nice to me).

Adam, the offer I made you several months ago re Superstud in particular still stands. Take me up on it whenever you are ready.

For anyone interested in getting into DC, the most important games to learn are Omaha, Omaha High Low, Padooki and Superstud. Some schools play a wide variety of other games, occasionally even including wild cards and/or more than one flop. But I'd advise focusing on the four staple games in the first instance and only work on the rarer variants when it becomes necessary.

Omaha High Low is by far the easiest game of the four to become competent at, since it is strategically the simplest. After that it is probably Omaha, then Padooki, then Superstud. Each game requires its own unique set of skills to play well though.

How is hi-lo simpler than straight hi? Straight hi is also closest to nlhe.

On the subject of 4/5/6, I absolutely hate 6-card PLO (hi). Everyone takes ages to read their hands, look at the board, read their hands again. Because everyone always has something hands take longer. Edges are much smaller as well. 5O is tolerable but 4O is the purest game and you get more than enough coolers and more than enough opportunity to gamble. I will always fight hard to keep 4O games at 4O and will always make sure when I start a new table that it's 4O only and convince people to change to 5 or 6. People have this idea that edges are bigger and that people gamble more but it's just not true.

I strongly disagree, I'd say it's Omaha hi then Stud.  

Play these games deep on deep tables (most variants are pot limit/limit anyway) and don't drink any stimulants while playing these games as they're usually slower then regular PLO or NLHE.  DTD has some great DC players, you should sit down with one of them and pick their brains...

Today is that day, exams are done, I have no more excuses (well a few), but I will pm shortly. I'd imagine 4o h/l deep is more complex than omaha. I imagine Padooki to be the easiest. This only from general stuff I have read and I'm certainly not saying your opinion is wrong. I will write a proper pm tomorrow probably, going to get SMASHED shortly.

BangBang, Honeybader is perhaps THE GUY when it comes to DC. He is certainly regarded by many as such, and plays regularly in the DC games at dtd.

TBF I'd never play DC at DTD anyway, I'm impatient and get tilted when 3 people go for a smoke together, usually killing or slowing down the game.  Never played DC with Stu but heard good things.. Enjoy your day..

Okay, I am going to explain why Omaha High Low is much easier to become fairly competent at than any of the other common DC games. I am also going to rant a bit about why I think High Low is not a very good game (even though I really enjoy it!)

The primary reason is that the basic strategy for High Low is very, very simple compared to most other games. And it can be learned really quickly. You know the sort of thing:

1. Play to scoop the pot.
2. Avoid being freerolled, and thus...
3. Don't overplay bare nut lows or bare nut highs, especially OOP.

There are a few more complicated points, but tbh from an overall strategic point of view there is not that much more to High Low than this. Not to play it fairly competently anyway.

The vast majority of High Low played in DC games in the UK is of the 5 or 6 card variety, with almost every pot going multiway. This just makes it an even simpler game in which you really don't need to know a great deal more than the very basic strategy. You have to learn how to value your hands of course - this is the most important skill in High Low. But this is really easy compared to other games, once you have got over the initial hurdle of learning how the split pot aspect works. And you need some hand-reading ability too, but again it is much easier to develop the requisite hand-reading skills compared to other games. One effect of the bi-directionality of the game is that 'advanced' hand-reading skills actually become less important.

If you were playing in short-handed and aggressive 4 card High Low games then merely understanding the simple basic strategy would not suffice. You would need to develop a more nuanced strategic understanding of the game. You would also need better hand reading skills; in fact better poker skills full stop. This is because you would actually have to 'play poker'.

But I have rarely found myself playing 4 card High Low in a short-handed aggressive game. And these advanced skills are largely unnecessary when playing multicard High Low where most pots are multiway. It is really, really simple to learn how to beat these sort of games.

In fact, I would argue that once you have reached a base level of competence at High Low, no-one can have too much of an edge over you in the sort of games that prevail in most DC schools. You could have the best High Low player in the world sitting in your game and he is not going to have a massive edge over you. Moreover, his edge against the weak players is not going to be all that much bigger than yours either. Basically High Low players are divided into two categories: those who understand and can rigorously implement the simple basic strategy, and those who cannot. The first group win from the second group with relatively little variance. There is far less room for different styles, or flair, or advanced skills than in the other games.

In fact, High Low is not even much of a game - or at least it would not be if everyone had basic competency at it. Put me in a No Limit Hold'em game with seven players who are much stronger than me and I will get destroyed, even though I play it fairly competently. Put me in a High Low game with seven much stronger poker players than me and we will just pass money round between us, with me losing a little bit on the rare occasions when the stronger players manage to find an opportunity to outplay me. And the game would be terrible... a conspiracy of tightness.

The only reason Omaha High Low plays so well in the DC mix is because many players do not understand this at all. They see it is an 'action game', when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. And they make massive fundamental errors again and again and again. It is - in a sense - a 'trick' designed to separate the weak players from their money quite quickly and with very few swings. In principle therefore I think it is a terrible game since it does not give the weak players any type of a punchers chance, compared to something like 4 card PLO which really does. But most weak players seem to really enjoy the game. Perhaps they feel a bit safer and that they lose their money more slowly since they usually have some sort of chance to get half or a quarter of the pot. It is an illusion of course - they may not regularly be having their entire stack wiped out in one hand, but they are still being bled to death... and pretty quickly too! Yet it is an illusion which allows them to enjoy the game and feel comfortable in it.

It is so easy to view (high only) PLO as being 'a bit like Hold'em' and thus imagine that this will be the easiest game to learn how to play fairly competently if you come from a Hold'em background. This is incorrect in my opinion. PLO strategy is pretty complicated and involved, and there are substantial differences between PLO and NLHE. Even learning how to play good 'basic' PLO in multiway pots (i.e. not using many 'poker skills') will take a fair while for someone from a strictly Hold'em background. Yet the basic strategy for High Low is really simple, and is really simple to learn. A good Hold'em player can become a passable High Low player much more quickly than s/he can become a passable PLO player.

what a post. nailed it.

I don't know, I sorta disagree. First of all, it seems strange to me that a game that encompasses all the skillsets of another game could be seen as more simple. Yes, PLO8 affords you fewer opportunities to handread, but there will still be spots where there is no low and there are spots to handread how strong someones low is or whether they have one at all. Secondly, the skills of learning how to value your hand just aren't that easy, or more people would in fact play a lot tighter, and winning players would call it a lot more than they do.

You could feasibly say the same thing about 6-card PLO, that it's a conspiracy of tightness, and yes, it does reward tighter play than 4card PLO, but that doesn't mean winning players have a higher edge.

I have emboldened the key bit Michael ;)

Not going to spend any more time on this though. I have given my argument; anyone can disagree if they like. But they should probably spend a good chunk of time actually playing in DC games before they choose to do so. IMO any competent player with a lot of experience in DC games knows that what I am arguing is clearly true.

My main point is that you're saying it's easy to win, but it's not, otherwise more people would be winning and more people would be choosing it.

It is very easy to play this game fairly competently. The fact that most players play it terribly does not prove anything. The majority of players do not understand the simple basic strategy. Many of those who do choose not to implement it rigorously and consistently, for a variety of reasons. And the punishment for deviating from 'correct play' is much more severe in High Low than in most other games.

Also, lots of players do choose this game on their button. And many of the guys who choose it are terrible at it.

(I've snipped it to make the quote shorter, not cos the post was tez).

Ray Zee says exactly this in his Omaha H/L book, although he's talking about Limit O8- he says that there are two types of games, easy games where you can win by just playing tight, and tougher games where everybody knows the basics and you need something more.

Despite reading this book, I'm still terrible at O8, but I haven't practised much.

PLO hi/lo is an easy game to win at against weak players and very difficult to even beat the rake/session versus competent opponents in my opinion.

My best advice would be that if you are in a game where they play PLO hi/lo or super stud for 50% of the orbits then leave and play hold em. I mean if someone is good enough at superstud to give away position in DC by choosing it then you don't really want to be playing them.

Saying that though I did spend about 30 hours concentrating on the players that choose superstud to try to learn from them but it just put me off DC altogether. Seems like a lot of rocks play this game all over the country to me?

Ming in Blackpool was the only exception. What a fkn legend. Taught us all the games, took all our money then got told off by brush for dancing on the poker table! I wanna be like him when I grow up.

I'd never leave a game in which many players are choosing Superstud on their buttons.

Superstud is nowhere near as simple a game to play well as Omaha High Low. It requires a much wider and more developed skill-set and strategic understanding. And many of the skills necessary for playing Superstud well are pretty difficult for new players to learn if they have mainly played flop games. It is a really, really good game.

oh come now,


I choose superstud,


pot


pot


REPOT


get theeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere

That was my point, although made poorly. I think superstud is the hardest game to learn to play and achieve a reasonable level of understanding. The thing is a lot of DC players kind of find it addictive for some reason. So if Rexas is learning all these games or trying to improve at them it's a real pain in the arse if 50% of games are hi/ lo as its a lot harder to enter a pot.

Maybe they only choose it a lot when I am playing? Hahaha. Yes that makes a lot of sense when I think about it.

If you enjoy strategy and mind games DC is great fun, just don't expect to win a fortune.

DC overall is a good earner but its incredibly boring to be profitable at it.

Here is how it works. At every festival over the country nearly the same 6 players will sit down and leave 2 seats for the patsys who are on the piss or just fancy a change from nlhe or PLO. You get paid from the two fresh faces and do not get paid even massive coolers from the regs as they have seen it all before.

I love how when regs get up plenty they only ever choose split pot games too! It's like hit n running whilst still there.

Rexas. Do yourself a favour and don't bother learning the games to a high level or you might turn into one of these leeches.

Flame away.

PLO8 + Superstud are the two worst games to pick on your btn. (I like both these games a lot)

Saying i) PLO is "simmilar to holdem" or ii) PLO is a simpler game than PLO8 is entirely incorrect.

4O and Padooki are the two best btn games (Padooki the best ofc) but I think that's pretty close.

Superstud is the hardest game to pick up properly (as in to stop yourself making costly mistakes) IMO, and the hardest game to really "master" is Padooki, the most profitable game to play REALLY REALLY well these days for live poker is PLO.

It's padooki only in UK.

If you choose 4 PLO you only get action from monsters and you cant get paid. At least with padooki you always have a play to win the pot.

 If I gave one tip about DC games it would be that, imo, any player who chooses plo8 or superstud will never pay you off for value in other games.

I remember a game in the International when I was towards the end of a 24 hour bender. It was plo triple flop, but whoever won most flops won? That was a the easiest game ever. I mean even the most pissed player ever can work out if you can't win 2 of em?

I was just so happy that you won the bloody pot not 2/3  of it. What is that game?

I remember that game at the international, triple flop omaha was a laugh. I played it there with a few of the dealers early one morning. There was a hand where the one the dealers (russian sounding name like "Slav") made the nuts on every board, something sick like Straight flush, quads and royal flush, every one got money in on the flop, and he backdoored every board!!  Miss that game.  I preferred the way they did it, 6 players, you all chose a different game, then played 6 hands of each on rotation.

That's it. And you knew what round was next too somehow. It's all a blur but was a fun visit to town for sure.

Not sure what you mean by this, seems like you might be implying that 4-PLO is a "nuts only" type game, and that people don't call down "light"  or gamble - this is defo not at all the case in my experience, I'd say that you get as much action at 4-PLO as any other game, certainly in terms of having value-bets called (more action action in Padooki and S-Stud prolly)

There is also a LOT of bluffing in 4-PLO, mostly semi-bluffing ofc.

6-PLO is way different, yo surrender some positional advantage and there is a lot less scope to take post-flop liberties as you have to be very careful.

If PLO is a "nuts/monsters only" game then what is 5/6O?

6O is a nuts+re-draw make the punters think you're gambling with them but really you're just waiting for them to over-commit with a hand that looks a LOT better than it is.

4O people, PUNISH THE NITS.

It's rare to be deep enough in UK casinos to punish them. Anyway I am at work sober and prefer this thread when I am plastered.

Gouty, I don't really agree with much of what you have said about Dealers Choice; the way DC games play in general, or your views on specific games in the mix. I know you don't want to discuss this when sober ;) but next time you are drunk perhaps you can say a little more about your experience of playing DC games? You mention Blackpool and having played with Ming, is that where you are from? And do I know you? Is this the main DC school you have played in?

Your view that most DC games are heavily populated by 'competent nits' who are merely waiting to get the nuts plus 10 nut redraws and trick the punters into playing a big pot is not at all a fully accurate description - although there is, of course, a small element of truth to it. In reality, most of these old-time nits are pretty poor players who have developed a few street smarts and learned that tight (yet passive) play allows them to win a little money in soft games. The reason these guys are bad is not due to their tightness, it is due to their passivity.

Also, they are often not as tight as many people think. I have heard many DC players referred to as nits and I am thinking "WTF! Are you serious? That guy plays almost every hand!" But because these guys do a lot of limping in and calling raises, and only start betting when they finally have got the monster, they are considered nitty. These guys are so easy to beat! They dribble their money away slowly, calling bets and raises for 20% of their stack and then folding later streets (or sometimes just letting you get to SD for free when you have a marginal hand) when they don't make the nuts. They don't seem 'value' at first glance because they are not punting lots of money in with marginal holdings when the pot gets big. But really this is an illusion, and they are often great value in a different way.

I don't agree at all with the comment you made about most DC games being too shallow to punish these guys effectively. There are two reasons for my disagreement. First, whilst many games start shallow they grow over the night and by halfway through often play very deep. Plus many games start out quite deep anyway, for example in the DTD 5/5 game most of us sit with at least a grand at the start of the night and some players much more than this.

My second reason is that it is perfectly possible to punish the weak/passive nits when they have fairly short stacks. They limp in and call raises for a decent chunk of their stack trying to hit. Then they fold when they miss. The times they do hit something good you will try not to pay them off, whilst stealing all the pots when they are not happy to commit. Granted sometimes you bet the flop and they raise all-in and you have enough equity to call it off and so have to pay them off. But they dribble away so much when they call and then fold that they are not able to make up for this when they finally have something good. And this is even more the case when they have short money, because they can't get enough value with their short stacks to make up for all those folds in small pots.

If a short stacked nit was playing a rigorous and skilful ninja short stack style (lots of limp reraising preflop and check-raise jamming postflop, trapping dead money in the pot etc) then I agree they would be very tough to beat (and would spoil the game). But the overwhelming majority of these guys do not use their short-stack as a powerful weapon in this way. Instead they dribble.

its defo not rare in the games i play/have played in over last couple of years, and secondly you dont need to be deep to punish the nits, in fact its actually easier tp punish (although you cant punish quite as severely) them shallow rather than deep.

Whats the difference between Padooki and Badugi?

Padooki is pot limit whereas badugi traditionally fixed limit,

the games in terms of structure are identical, 4 rounds of betting, and 3 draws, aim is to make best possible "pad/bad/ooki/ugi" hand which is a lowball, rainbow hand  Ad 2c 3h 4s (or other cominatronic possibilities) is the nuts, A235/A245/A345/A236/A246/A346/A256/A346/A456 and so on is the Nuts downwards.

In BADUGI, if you dont have a BADUGI (4 rainbow cards) you have a "3 Card BADUGI" i.e A233 would be an "A23 three-card badugi" so if I ended up with  Ac 3d 4s 8s i'd have an A34 three-card badugi.

in PADOOKI, if you dont have a PADOOKI (note a padooki, and a badugi mean the same thing lol) you have a "FLUSH" and these are ranked in the same way, so  Ahrt 2h 8h 9d would = a "9 flush" - also it doesn't matter how many of each suit you have, it's either rainbow (a padooki) or a flush (not a padooki).

That is the fundamental difference in the game. The difference this makes to the play of it is that Padooki encouages a lot more bluffing, in badugi you have a gd 3-card hand A35 for e.g you can draw draw draw then use your 3 card hand as a bluff catcher if needs be, so you can play a big draw for value as it does have some immediate value, in PADOOKI you might draw a 7 flush (strong hand) but you've got to break and keep drawing to your A34 draw, ith no gte that at the end of the draws your have any semblence of a hand to bluff-catch with (or have any SD valuee at all) you that i) encourages people to bluff you more after the 3rd draw as unlike in badugi you wont DEFO have a bluff-catcher, and ii) put you in a position where you have to bluff as well, as it's perfectly feasible you've had a sick draw and ended up with a K flush or a pair of 4's something with abso no value whatsoever.

Padooki just a much more action/gambling type game, nothign wrong with badugi at all it's a v nice game, its just structured much more like a limit game than a big-bet drawing game like padooki is.

The difference is in the way the hands are ranked.

In badugi, if no-one makes a 'badugi' (i.e. 4 unpaired cards of different suits) then the player with the best 3 card hand or 'incomplete' wins. Thus if player one is drawing to Ad 2h 3s and player 2 is drawing to Ac 2s 4d, if both players fail to make a complete badugi then player one wins because he has the best incomplete (3 card hand). The fourth card each player ends up with after the final change is not considered.

In padooki, all 4 cards are used at showdown even if no player makes a padooki. There is no such thing as an 'incomplete'. If no-one makes a padooki then the best 'flush' wins. A 'flush' means a 4 card unpaired hand that is not a padooki. Normal lowball rules apply. For example,
Ad 2d 5c 8s is a '8 flush', and is beaten by
Ac 4c 6c 7h which is a '7 flush'
Note that the second hand would lose under badugi rules since it has three cards of the same suit and is thus a '2 card incomplete'. But in padooki this does not matter - all 4 cards play, and if you do not have a padooki then it does not matter if you have more than two of the same suit.

The best starting hand is a substantial favourite at badugi since it automatically wins if all players fail to improve during the draws. Thus Ac 2d 3h always beats Ad 2h 4s when both hands brick the final draw. This makes it much less strategically complex than the padooki version where all 4 cards play. In padooki the Ac 2d 3h could catch a Kh or even a 3s (i.e. a pair up) on the final draw and get beaten by the Ad 2h 4s which catches a Js. The first hand would either have a 'King flush' or a 'pair of threes' and both would lose to the 'Jack flush'.

The reason padooki is more complex strategically is due to the increased bluffing and snowing (standing pat without a padooki) opportunities that the difference in showdown rules creates.

Good explanations. Thanks guys

Just for clarity it's your highest card that counts not your lowest card. 2345 should slip in to that list between A345 and A236.

Whoever has the lowest highest card wins. (Ignoring flushes and pair ups obv).

Yep we'll spotted Matt.