If anyone still doubts the profitability of stud games, this should put all debate to rest. Of course, the catch is you have to remember which one it is you're playing...

HORSE - Razz ($100/$200), Ante $15, Bring-In $30 (converter)

Seat 1: $4,199
Seat 3: $4,793
Hero: $3,749
Seat 5: $8,534
Seat 6: $6,492.50
Seat 7: $7,000
Seat 8: $4,172

3rd Street - (1.05 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3___folds
Seat 3: xx xx T___brings-in___raises___calls
Hero: Q 6 3___folds
Seat 5: xx xx 4___folds
Seat 6: xx xx 6___folds
Seat 7: xx xx 4___raises___raises
Seat 8: xx xx 8___calls___calls

4th Street - (10.05 SB)

Seat 3: xx xx T J___raises___calls
Seat 7: xx xx 4 9___folds
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7___bets___raises
Seat 7 said, "what game is this??"

5th Street - (8.03 BB)

Seat 3: xx xx T J T___raises___raises
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7 Q___bets___raises___calls
Seat 8 said, "razz i hope"

6th Street - (16.03 BB)

Seat 3: xx xx T J T 9___checks
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7 Q 2___checks

River - (16.03 BB)

Seat 3: xx xx T J T 9 xx___checks
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7 Q 2 xx___checks

Total pot: (16.03 BB)

Results:

Why does Seat 8 check 6th and 7th? I guess he can't expect his opponent to continue when he figures out the game but why check it down?

Dang. I got excited when I saw the title.

I was hoping that Stars had finally added the Canadian version of HORSE to their lineup.

Wow, seat 7 speaking up in the middle of the hand is just insanely out of line. That kind of comment can have way greater effect than telling his hole cards. Potentially he cost/saved one of the remaining players up to 8 BB, and probably had an average effect of $100 or so, at least.

Also, seat 7:s fold seems pretty bad. Presumably he holds something like 9542 against 87A2, getting, at worst, 4.5:1 on a peel. And that's not counting that JT well could pay off big when drawing dead. Even if he had 9862 he still had 1/3 in showdown equity, which would be enough to take to 7th as long as both other guys are in. Seems like a $300, or more, mistake to me.

Anyone else think it's strange that he confuses R with S/S8 rather than the other way around? Seems like an odd mistake to do after playing a round of O8.

Re: Checking down

If seat 3 has figured out the game there's pretty much no value in betting. If he hasn't, it's more likely that he will notice it is razz, if a Q872-board bets into him after he capped 5th.

Similar, but weaker reasoning, on 7th. On that street it does seem like a no-brainer bet. He's still only going to make like 1/1000 of a BB on it, but it's free money.

Unless he started with a K in the hole, he had a dead lock on his opponent. There is no downside to betting, so why on earth not? If your opponent folds, so what, no different than if he checks.

If seat 7 still had cards, then he's allowed to comment. Since he's folding anyway, he shouldn't, and you can make a case that he shouldn't anyway. I, for one, wouldn't want TJ to be clued in.

Seat 8's checks on sixth and seventh defy explanation.

Checking on 6th isn't all that strange. After all, the other guy capped 5th, so if he hasn't twigged what's happening he's probably going to bet again. It's a pretty reasonable thing to do, even if we're sure he's not going to fold to a bet.

7th is different. But it's only an obvious mistake, as opposed to a big one.

Why should he be allowed to comment when he has cards?

It's not different in effect from telling someone not to call with xxxKKKKx against xxxA234x. AFAIK that's not allowed when you're the third guy in the hand. Just because it's not explicit advice doesn't mean "one player to a hand" shouldn't apply. Granted, there's no specific wording to forbid it, but the spirit of the rule is pretty clear.

The comment from seat 7 came immediately before he folded, but in either case it's clearly out of line. No one complained or called him on it in the chat box though.

who was seat 7?