I have recently been looking through a bunch of data from hands I played on line and I have found some unsettling things about my play. The worst thing is that a significant portion of my losses can be attributed to Axs and Kxs hands. I figure that this is probably due to both playing these hands in poor position and calling too many bets with them when the flop doesn’t fit. Does anyone have any good guidelines to play these hands? Do you only want to play these hands with lots of callers and in late position? Can you open from middle position with Axs? What kinds of things govern your strategy if you flop a pair (of either) on the flop?

Answer 1:

It depends. In general, you want to follow your own advice, play them with lots of callers, play them in late position. More specifically. You probably want to be getting at least 4:1 on your action if you are playing in late position. You want better action the further from the button you are, which means that you probably won’t be playing them from any position except the button, one off the button and two off the button, under normal circumstances. (Game conditions may dictate that you raise UTG with A5s, but forget these kind of plays normally). The only time you are going to be playing Axs (and Kxs) with few players is from the blinds. Again you’re still looking to get action on your money, from the blinds you probably want better action than 4:1 action since you’ll be acting early. On the other hand if only one person has limped in and you’re in the small blind, you’ll be getting 5:1 action, assuming that you are in a 1/2 small blind. The key to remember that this is a flop or drop hand (which hand isn’t?), so if you don’t hit a flush draw, or 2 split pair (or better), you are almost always going to bail on the hand. The trickiest thing is playing a flopped top pair. Now you have to make a decision. Are you ahead, or are you behind. If you are ahead, you should bet. If you are behind you should check/fold. Making this determination is the hardest part about playing these hands, and if you don’t have confidence that you’ll be able to make this decision correctly, then you should ALWAYS check/fold. Being wrong here is very costly. Things that you should consider when you flop top pair with Axs (and Kxs):
* How many players you are facing?
* Whether the pot was raised pre-flop?
* What their limping/raising requirements are?
* How tricky your opponents are?
* Your position?
Again let me emphasize, if you have any doubt that you can determine whether you are ahead or behind, check/fold and save yourself money in the long run. Sometimes you’ll fold a winner, but most of the time you won’t.
Answer 2:
These hands are attractive but easily dominated when the flush doesn’t it. They’re simply not as good as they look. In a relatively loose-passive game (not many raises pre-flop, usually 3-6 see the flop) Axs is playable (for me) with at least 2 callers before me and no raise. This can’t happen in early position and rarely in middle position. Kxs I routinely throw away with the possible exception of having the button and 4+ callers in front without a raise. In a game where pre-flop raises are common, dump these hands without a second thought unless you’re late enough to have an idea that there won’t be a raise behind you. I don’t open-call with Axs. I MIGHT open-raise from late position if I thought I could steal the blinds or at least isolate a weak blind. This opportunity is rare in the games I play but happens in tourneys fairly often. In most cases, fold to any action if you don’t have a flush draw or 2 pair.
Answer 3:
I have Ad6d in late position. One raise by a madman so I call to see the flop. The flop comes Kd Qd 9d and I have a made flush. I raise and everyone is ut but the madman. I figure him for trips or two pair (he had trips) so I raise his bet and he calls. The turn is Jd and I am a happy camper until the river comes with Kh. He re-raises and I figure he’s got the boat. Nope, quad Kings. This guy was crazy and once he had trips there was nothing on God’s Green Earth that would have kept him from staying until the river. Thus: The only variable I would add to the previous posters is knowing your opponent.

Are the “little charts” below the ones to which you are referring?
>>>> opposing odds against odds against
>>>> high pair J-10-suited K-10-suited
>>>> ———— ————— —————
>>>> A-A 3.73-to-1 4.60-to-1
>>>> K-K 4.06-to-1 5.82-to-1
>>>> Q-Q 4.46-to-1 2.08-to-1
>>>> J-J 4.61-to-1 2.10-to-1
>>>> 10-10 1.58-to-1 1.79-to-1
>>>> 9-9 1.05-to-1 1.11-to-1
>>>> …the J-10 fares better in four of these six cases — but
>>>> in the two cases where the K-10 is better, against Q-Q
>>>> and against J-J, the K-10 is a LOT better…
JP Massar:
>>> Here is another metric. Against the set of ‘standard’ S&M
>>> early position raising hands, AA-JJ,AK,AQ,AJs,KQs[,]
>>> JTs and KTs have almost identical pot equity of 32%.
>> opposing odds against odds against
>> (offsuit) J-10-suited K-10-suited
>> ———— ————— —————
>> A-Q 1.48-to-1 1.43-to-1
>> A-6 1.04-to-1 1.16-to-1
>> Q-6 1.05-to-1 *0.49-to-1*
>> The K-10 fares a little better against a ‘good’ A-Q, while the
>> J-10 is a little better against a ‘fair’ A-6 — but then the K-10 is
>> a LOT better, 2.06-to-1 FAVORITE, against a ‘blah’ Q-6…
Please do tell us just what it is that you think is so “off base” here…
Answer 1:
Since you ask, the problem is that your charts, while undoubtedly correct, provide very little extra fodder for the pro KT side of the debate. They don’ttake into account the effect of future bets or the effect of multiway pots. Thus it is very possible that the better hand is not the one that is indicated by your analysis. When I rate JT slightly higher for the good but not great player in typical games, I tried to intuitively factor all of this stuff in. Anyone who merely shows the results of their simulations to pit one hand against another, without explaining how the bets or other players in the pot could affect those results, is not on my list of top 50 poker analysts.

Answer 2:
This is an interesting debate, and I think both sides have merits. I think it is clear that the simulated numbers alone don’t fully describe the hands, but find them very useful as one benchmark of a hand’s value. In the case of JTs vs KTs, I more clearly see David’s point. Maybe in a simulation KTs had the same equity as JTs, but the actual, live play of the hand would radically affect those numbers. In the simulation, KTs does best against the lower pairs, making up for the domination by the higher pairs. However, intuitively, this doesn’t hold true to me. When the flop comes K95, KT will have a difficult time folding vs the aces, and may even be tempted to throw in some raises. However, against the QQ’s, or JJ’s, the KT might not get the action that
it wants. In other words, it seems a classic case of winning a small pot while losing a larger pot.

Answer 3:

The chart was NOT posted merely as a fact. Rather it was posted to the best of my recollection as an argument for the superiority of KT. This in spite of the fact that everyone knows that KT is better head up against most hands hot and cold and therefore anyone who argues for JT would clearly be taking it at least somewhat into account. Anyway you were the one who resurrected this argument.

Does anyone know of any computer versions of 3 card poker?
Answer 1:
Masque has a CD-ROM called Casino Game Pak that has 3 card poker in it. Be sure that you have the new updated version, as they have had a couple different versions out on the market.
Answer 2:
I have the Masque WSOP Deluxe Casino Pak (c) 1996 and it does not have 3 card poker. It has LIR and Caribbean Stud and Pai Gow, but not 3 card. I checked ConJelCo and the version offered looks like the same game and still boasts only 16 games.
Answer 3:
My Masque Casino Game Pak CD is (c) 1997, #10114, and is stamped with “Now includes Spanish 21 and Three Card Poker”.

We had a bit of a dispute in a home game last night about this situation.  Game is 5-stud, high/low, no qualifiers.  One player has  two aces showing; one has two sixes showing.  Our house rule has always been that in this situation the aces can be played as “13′s” for high and as “1′s” for low, thus the aces could scoop.  The victim was a newer player in the game and insisted that it was an oddball rule.  The rest of us see it as clear-cut.  What do you think?

Answer 1:

Unless you’re playing seven duece rules, an ace is always a potential scoop card or a potential scoop pair in 5 card stud hi/lo and 5 card draw hi/lo. Because of that scoop potential, which still exists even if it pairs, Ace is a critical card in those games and you pretty much just shouldn’t play without one.

Answer 2:

It’s not that odd ball of a game. Sklanksy talks about it in TOP with replace on the end. Aces usually go both ways in hi-lo games. That said, it is a strange enough concept (particularly to those who haven’t play hi-lo before) so that you should inform a newcomer about it, because you can surely see why he might be ticked off. If you’re playing a “low card in the hold wild” game, it’s also nice to let the guy know if aces can be used for low.

Answer 3:

In home games, the rules can be whatever you decide them to be. Just make sure all new players are made aware of all your rules. (When new situations come up, we usually let the dealer decide what to do during the hand and then vote for future reference when the hand is over.) In my game you can’t go both with only five cards. (You have to win both if you go both.)