First of all, nice to see some mixed game hands finally make it into the High Stakes thread!

Secondly, thought there was some interesting discussion points from it.

Poker Stars $200/$400 Limit Stud Hi/Lo $40 Ante - 6 players
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

3rd Street: (1.2 SB)
Ravenswood13: xx xx A____Ravenswood13 completes____Ravenswood13 caps!
Bluf_To_Much: xx xx J____Bluf_To_Much calls____Bluf_To_Much calls
Lrslzk: xx xx 3____Lrslzk raises____Lrslzk calls
SamRostan: xx xx 5____SamRostan 3-bets____SamRostan calls
Crazy Elior: xx xx 2____Crazy Elior brings in for $70____Crazy Elior calls____Crazy Elior calls
gordo16: xx xx 8____gordo16 calls____gordo16 calls____gordo16 calls

4th Street: (25.2 SB) (6 players)
Ravenswood13: xx xx A 8____Ravenswood13 bets____Ravenswood13 calls____Ravenswood13 calls
Bluf_To_Much: xx xx J K____Bluf_To_Much calls____Bluf_To_Much calls____Bluf_To_Much calls
Lrslzk: xx xx 3 Q____Lrslzk calls____Lrslzk folds
SamRostan: xx xx 5 6____SamRostan raises____SamRostan caps!
Crazy Elior: xx xx 2 6____Crazy Elior 3-bets____Crazy Elior calls
gordo16: xx xx 8 T____gordo16 calls____gordo16 calls

5th Street: (23.1 BB) (5 players)
Ravenswood13: xx xx A 8 8____Ravenswood13 checks____Ravenswood13 raises____Ravenswood13 caps!
Bluf_To_Much: xx xx J K 9____Bluf_To_Much checks____Bluf_To_Much calls____Bluf_To_Much calls
SamRostan: xx xx 5 6 2____SamRostan checks____SamRostan calls____SamRostan calls
Crazy Elior: xx xx 2 6 A____Crazy Elior bets____Crazy Elior 3-bets____Crazy Elior calls
gordo16: xx xx 8 T 8____gordo16 calls____gordo16 calls____gordo16 calls

6th Street: (43.1 BB) (5 players)
Ravenswood13: xx xx A 8 8 J____Ravenswood13 calls
Bluf_To_Much: xx xx J K 9 9____Bluf_To_Much checks____Bluf_To_Much calls
SamRostan: xx xx 5 6 2 6____SamRostan checks____SamRostan calls
Crazy Elior: xx xx 2 6 A 7____Crazy Elior bets
gordo16: xx xx 8 T 8 9____gordo16 folds

7th Street: (47.1 BB) (4 players)
Ravenswood13: xx xx A 8 8 J xx____Ravenswood13 calls____Ravenswood13 calls____Ravenswood13 calls
Bluf_To_Much: xx xx J K 9 9 xx____Bluf_To_Much checks____Bluf_To_Much raises____Bluf_To_Much caps!
SamRostan: xx xx 5 6 2 6 xx____SamRostan checks____SamRostan folds
Crazy Elior: xx xx 2 6 A 7 xx____Crazy Elior bets____Crazy Elior 3-bets____Crazy Elior calls

Final Pot: 59.1 BB
Ravenswood13 mucks A 8 8 J
Bluf_To_Much shows Q Q J K 9 9 Q (HI: a full house, Queens full of Nines)
Crazy Elior shows 5 4 2 6 A 7 J (HI: high card Ace; LO: 6,5,4,2,A)
Bluf_To_Much wins 29.544 BB
Crazy Elior wins 29.544 BB
(Rake: $5.00)

SamRostan: lol
SamRostan: give me a shoot please
SamRostan: cant watch any more

Think Elior and SamRostan's low hands play themselves, but the high side contested by Ravenswood and Bluf_To_Much seems quite poorly paid to me.

Ravenswood's hand seems like obvious Aces up so should he not be folding 7th even for the last two bets, especially when he's playing for half the pot, there's two low connected boards showing and Bluf_To_Much obviously going for the high side is raising.

Also to me, Bluf_To_Much's hand seems like a pretty straightforward fold on 4th given all the dead wheel spades and Ravenswood capped 3rd.

Not sure if I'm thinking about this hand in the wrong way from a low/mid-stakes POV. What does everyone else think?

Bluf_To_Much should have folded 4th or 5th, yeah. I could see him calling 4th maybe with rolled up queens, although he should be worried at that point about being freerolled by some strong lows. Cold calling 2 bets on 5th street seems really awful with a pair of queens and a gutshot, particularly considering Ravenswood is raising with a pair of 8s showing. Even if he thinks Ravenswood is weak, what's his line? Ravenswood still has 2 cards to draw against his queens going forward if he doesn't already have aces up or a set of 8s.

Bluff should fold third to the Aces open given the other cards. No idea what Gordon was doing.

I could see him folding to the 4bet on 3rd, but folding to the ace complete by itself with rolled up queens and not knowing what action the other 3 players are going to do? I don't think anyone is making that fold to 1 bet.

This is a split pot game, he has one pair less than Aces. Sometime such a hand plays well. This is not that situation.

If you lay down rolled up queens every time an ace completes in a 6-handed Stud8 game then you're playing the wrong game (or don't play it at all). You would have a much stronger argument if you said he should have folded when it came back around to him on 3rd after it was 4bet.

What situation are you referring to here? You're looking at how the rest of 3rd street played out and playing Monday morning quarterback? When he called the complete it was just one guy competing the only exposed ace, and that complete occurs what, 90% of the time?

He doesn't have Qqq, he has Qqj against an 8 that will play and an ace that open into a bunch of low cards.

An 8 that was forced to bring in that has god knows what underneath, and a few low cards that also could be holding god knows what underneath. There's not many cards the ace could have underneath that he wouldn't open with. His likelihood of opening at this point with an 8 complete and a limping jack in front of him is pretty high 6-handed regardless of his holdings.

Sorry man, we can agree to disagree here and move on I guess. Folding rolled up queens just because an ace opened up in front of me in stud8 seems incredibly nitty. If Ravenswood has been folding/not completing a lot of aces prior then maybe I could see it but otherwise I don't see how anyone would fold to an initial ace complete. The 4bet, after everyone with low cards is raising/re-raising/calling, sure. The complete, no way.

The 8 was not the bring in. What's your plan when the ace catches a 10 and bets? Your hand is face up as a ****ty medium pair. I'm not saying you should always fold a medium pair to an ace open, but I would here.

Lol sick one a queen falls dead on 4th and he still takes all the bets to the chin. Hawkes you are wrong sorry, yes sometimes you can play a big pair vs an ace door this isn't one of those times.

As I said to him multiple times: you told to the 4bet on 3rd, not the complete. There's nothing wrong about that opinion. You want to take the more conservative route and just cave in to a random ace complete with plenty of unknown action behind then go for it.

FWIW having QQJ is called having "wired queens" or "buried queens" but not "rolled up queens" which would be QQQ. And I agree that in most cases it's a pretty standard fold with QQ here, especially with a high door. QQ with a low door is marginally better.

Yes in poker not all opinions are equal. In a tough game nobody will make $ vs a reasonable player with QQJ when the ace completes this board. Can I prove it? Probably not. But I feel safe in saying you will not get a lot of good players to agree with you.

What the heck did Gordo have? I was trying to figure that out on 5th and thought it might be 67 but then he folded when he caught a 9. I guess maybe he had some kind of wired pair? Whatever it was, it seems pretty bad.

I also fold QQJ on third so glad that others agree with that. The most frequent time I play high pairs versus an ace is when I have opponent who sometimes limps in or calls a completion with an ace and never has a pair of aces when he does so. There are other situations that arise sometimes but not this one.

Also please stop calling QQJ rolled up queens, especially when suggesting other people are playing the wrong game or don't play it at all.

Queens is a muck to an Ace completion on this board. Equity probably capped at 20% under ideal conditions, say everybody has unpaired low cards that block each other somewhat. Most of the time you'll have breakeven equity (17%) or less in a spot with horrible RIO.

Versus complete ranges for all players you might have breakeven equity, but then you're playing the hand for the fun of it, not to make money.

I say "might" because simulating it requires expressing complete ranges for every hand in a 6-way pot, and that requires information about the players I don't have, and guessing would be worse than not doing it.

So I'm not doing it.

Would love to see the simulation, particularly of QQJ vs xxA, xx2, xx8 and maybe one more hand (which was a reasonable expectation of the action behind him when he called the complete, as opposed to a family pot which actually happened. It's even also highly possible that the xx2 or xx8 was going to fold to a complete at the time of his complete call). Anyone have a stud8 sim?

There's no way anyone in a 2/4 online game is calling the bring in UTG planning to fold to a complete.

Criticizing a player for calling an ace complete with queens and then saying an 8 would never fold to a complete after limping if an A, 2 and a 3 and/or 5 are in too?

I think if nothing else, the hand shows that people don't make logical decisions even in mid and higher stakes games.

Limping UTG and folding getting a million to one closing the action is not something many players would do, even fish. It might happen now and then but it's not "highly possible" at all.

I'm really struggling to figure out what he had!

Other two 8s are dead. 7d, 9d and few others are dead. An absolute boat load of wheel cards are dead. Any kind of buried pair surely realizes how dead they are when Ravenswood caps 5th, bar buried Ts. Is it at all possible that he's made some kind of Hero fold with specifically Ts full?

And folded to 1 bet by a low just because he saw Bluf improve with a 9? No way.

I think he had Ad and 10d underneath or Ad and a low D, more likely the former since he called on 4th when the lows continued to improve and he was still far away from hitting even an 8.

Anyone completing 90% of under cards here with as with low bring in and those boards behind them is playing way to many hands. You are going to be forced to have something too much.

sux being a mid stakes playa when ppl givin away cash at these limits...lol wow!

Move up to where they don't respect your raises

Yeah trying to construct accurate ranges here sounds pretty hard. Luckily simulating random ranges is pretty easy! Looks like wired queens is the second nuts with about a 1% equity edge all-in if everyone is playing chinese poker on the side and merely clicking buttons here.

ProPokerTools Stud Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
qsqdjh	17.83%	32,737	181,085	148	0	0
**As	18.87%	37,472	99,572	162	98,586	1,002
**3s	15.68%	30,073	73,119	209	97,342	997
**5s	16.29%	33,603	81,992	272	94,846	1,004
**2s	15.28%	26,988	68,243	169	97,643	1,051
**8d	16.06%	32,406	95,387	244	73,839	735