Quote:
Originally Posted by RIPUA
I'm not home with access to my bookcase now, but It's a concept from one of the versions of the Clairvoyance Game in Mathematics of Poker, and explained as applied to LHE in Further limit Holdem. The concept is that even without draws present it may be correct to bluff with a ratio greater than alpha when there are more cards to come.
Frequencies matter much less in stud, and after Third street just describing the situations is so complex that almost nobody has worked on them. The exposed cards are the dominating factor in deciding how to play hands, and frequencies of plays are all bounded (sometimes dictated) by the hand range your board represents, relative to a completely different range described by your opponents' boards.
You need to apportion your plays, but it a smaller factor than in Holdem, where personal cards are hidden and players share a board. Hand reading in Stud can be much more precise, and what you can represent is always informed by what cards have been seen.
There has been much less mathematical work done on stud, precisely because in so many situations play is constrained by exposed card information. Fine tuning frequencies can usually only gain you tiny fractions of the value of getting that part right.
Still it's an edge, and although it's massively more complex than Holdem due to the butterfly effect of exposed cards, I'd love to see somebody tackle later street theory for stud games.
