The Initial Complexity of Stud: Ante Proportions

Straight seven-card stud and Texas hold'em are the two most popular forms of poker played today. My game is stud. I actually enjoy its intricacies, complexities, and challenges. Without getting into a fruitless debate with myself or with you over which game is "better" to play, I will make mention of some of the more difficult aspects of stud that inherently present themselves to players in this and future columns. Furthermore, I would be wholly unqualified to debate the finer points of hold'em due to my having played far fewer hours of it. A couple of my poker-playing friends have even gone so far as to call me a "one-trick pony," due to my exclusive allegiance to one form of poker, and that is a topic, unto itself, whose merits I will touch on in a future column. Since all poker fundamentally begins as a struggle for the antes, blinds, and/or forced bets, I believe it appropriate to make that my inaugural topic of discussion.

One of the most seemingly apparent but rarely discussed aspects of stud that makes it trickier than hold'em is the fact that virtually every limit has different ante and low-card/forced-bet proportions. Contrast this with the fact that almost every hold'em limit has blinds that are proportionally identical, insofar as the small blind is 50 percent of the small bet and the big blind is equal to the small bet. The exceptions are generally the limits that are evenly divisible by three – for example, $15-$30, $30-$60, and so on. Those limits usually have a small blind that is 66.7 percent (two-thirds) of the small bet. But those are basically the only two templates. In contrast, almost every stud game has different proportions. In some cases, the differences are slight, but in others, the differences are huge. I will illustrate this by examples, and will simply start at the bottom and work my way up the ladder of the most common structures seen in Las Vegas.

$1-$5 with no ante is the smallest stud game at The Mirage and Bellagio. This game is truly unlike any of the others that I will mention, for two reasons. There is no ante, and there is an absence of the traditional rigid structure to the betting procedure due to its spread-limit component. Although the forced bet (a.k.a. and hereinafter referred to as the "bring-in") is only $1, you theoretically could have nothing in the pot except a single $5 bet from the low card opting to bet the maximum against you. Your decision to call this proportionally large bet could be met with much smaller $1 and/or $2 bets on subsequent streets. This makes for a game unlike the others. There is no opportunity for ante stealing since there is no ante, and, commonly, all there is to go after is the $1 that the low card was forced to bet. Putting up $4, $5, or even $6 just to steal $1 is mathematical suicide. My opinion is that you should be exceptionally conservative in choosing your hands on third street. Despite having a proportionally large rake to fade, this game has potential for profitability due to the large percentage of players playing far too many hands when both immediate and implied pot odds do not warrant it. Summary: Play ultratight on third street in selecting what you perceive to be the best starting hand, but once committed to a hand, bet aggressively until circumstances change to warrant a laydown.

$5-$10 constitutes the next limit up. (Note: For readers in California and other parts of the country where there are smaller structured limits such as $2-$4 and $3-$6, please look for other limits in this column that have identical or similar proportions. I thought it superfluous to discuss $3-$6 in depth when $30-$60 may be identical proportionally. I am also aware that in some cardrooms, $5-$10 is played with a $1 ante and a $2 bring-in.) At any rate, the $5-$10 Las Vegas game is unique, in that the ante is only 10 percent (50 cents) of the small bet ($5), and the bring-in is a mere 20 percent ($1). To the best of my knowledge, it plays slightly differently from any other limit. Like the $1-$5 game, correct play on third street is very careful selection of your starting hands. Unlike the $1-$5 game, ante stealing does exist, but it should be done only in very key situations. Think about the following: Assuming a full game of eight players (all subsequent limit analyses will also assume full games) with a 50-cent ante and a $1 bring-in, you are risking $5 to make exactly $5 back. This is a dead-even 1-to-1 proposition, and not as profitable compared to those of other limits. Obviously, if your game is shorthanded, the pot you are stealing will be even smaller, although with fewer contestants, your expectation to get away with it increases. My recommendation is to steal antes only if no callers exist and you are in last position or close to it with a very high doorcard. Conversely, if you are the low card and are faced with a raise, and have little with which to continue, let it go, and do so with great ease, as you have to make a proportionally monstrous leap from your initial $1 bring-in to a $5 call. Summary: Play very tightly on third street. Here are the ratios and percentages: A (Ante) = 10 percent, B.I. (Bring-in) = 20 percent, A.S. (Ante Stealing) = 1-to-1, C (Calling a raise with the low card, assuming your forced bet is already in the pot and there is one other player) = 2.5-to-1

$10-$20, which has been a cardroom staple for many years, is the next limit I will address. (Note: Again, I realize there are $6-$12, $8-$16, and even $9-$18 games in existence, but for purposes of brevity, I will not devote a paragraph to each of them and will ask that you compare them, if possible, to similar or identical proportions of subsequently discussed structures. Also, I have almost no personal experience with those limits.) The ante of the $10-$20 game is proportionally identical to that of the $5-$10 game, as it is also 10 percent ($1). However, the bring-in is $3, which is 30 percent of the small bet. Although this is a proportionally much larger bring-in than the $5-$10 game (30 percent vs. 20 percent of the small bet), it affects the decision to steal antes only slightly. In my opinion, the total amount of money in the pot is the relevant number. Again, assuming a full game, you would be risking $10 to steal $11, which is only slightly better than the 1-to-1 ratio in the $5-$10 game. However, the low card is now actually getting better odds to call your steal. In the $5-$10 game, the low card would place $4 more into a pot that is currently $10. This is a 2.5-to-1 proposition. In this game, the low card would place $7 more into a $21 pot, and hence would receive 3-to-1 odds. What this means compared to the $5-$10 game is, the increase in profitability for the low card to call you goes up more than the increase in profitability of your ante steal. Summary: As in $5-$10, play tightly on third street, giving slightly more consideration to what is prudent in ante-stealing decisions. Ratios and percentages: A = 10 percent, B.I. = 30 percent, A.S. = 1.1-to-1, C = 3-to-1

$15-$30 stud has a $2 ante and a $5 bring-in. This means that we are doubling the ante of the $10-$20 structure, but increasing the overall game size by only 50 percent. We are also increasing the bring-in by 66.7 percent. Let's see how the ante steal plays out. Eight antes are $16 and the bring-in makes the pot $21, so we are getting 4.2-to-3 odds when attempting a steal. This is considerably more than our odds in the lower games. However, the low card would need to place only an additional $10 into a $36 pot. So, now we are talking about a 3.6-to-1 proposition. Compared to the $10-$20 game, the value of the steal went up slightly more than the increase in value of the low card's call. Summary: Be prepared to steal more antes, as it is worth it, but also be prepared to get called. Players have a tendency to call raises much more easily if they have to throw in only two more chips (as opposed to three more in a $20-$40 game, or having to throw in higher-denomination chips to call the completed bet in $10-$20). Ratios and percentages: A = 13.33 percent, B.I. = 33.33 percent, A.S. = 1.4-to-1, C = 3.6-to-1

$20-$40 increases the ante by $1 (to $3), but the low card has the same bring-in as $15-$30. A steal attempt pits our $20 against a pot of $29. We are getting 1.45-to-1 on our money, which is better than the previous ratios of 1-to-1, 1.1-to-1, and 1.4-to-1, respectively. Calling entails our putting $15 more into a pot that already has $49. This works out to be just over a 3.25-to-1 proposition. Compared to the $15-$30 game, stealing is of greater value and calling is of lesser value. This is a very important concept to which I would submit most players who vacillate between these two seemingly similar limits do not give adequate consideration. Furthermore, it is psychologically more difficult for the potential caller to reconcile the leap from one to four chips by having to throw in three more. Summary: Steal more antes than you would in any of the previously mentioned games, and be more prepared to let the "thieves" go than you would in $15-$30. There is always another hand. Ratios and percentages: A = 15 percent, B.I. = 25 percent, A.S. 1.45-to-1, C = 3.27-to-1

$30-$60 kicks our ante up to $5 (16.67 percent of the small bet), and the bring-in is $10 (33.33 percent). If the $15-$30 game had a $2.50 ante, they would be proportionally identical. Hence, some similarities exist, but that theoretical 50-cent difference turns out to be a sizeable one. The $30 raise goes after a pot of $50, a 5-to-3 proposition, but bear in mind that the low card needs to throw in only $20 to an $80 pot, and gets 4-to-1 on his money. Summary: Compared to $20-$40, ante stealing is initially even more proportionally profitable and slightly more necessary due to the proportional increase in ante, but calling the steal is substantially more proportionally profitable. As a result, $30-$60 should still be played relatively tightly and even more carefully. Ratios and percentages: A = 16.67 percent, B.I. = 33.33 percent, A.S. = 1.67-to-1, C = 4-to-1

$40-$80 is a limit worthy of a fair amount of discussion. First of all, it is played with two conventional structures. It may be the only limit that is played with two vastly different structures depending simply on the casino you are in. Either it has a $5 ante and a $10 bring-in or a $10 ante and a $10 bring-in. (Note: I recall a time when it was played yet another way at Commerce Casino with a $5 ante and $15 bring-in.) To the best of my current knowledge, it is rarely played outside of Las Vegas with a $10 ante, so I will discuss the more common structure first.

We see that by retaining the same ante and bring-in of a $30-$60 game, but augmenting the game by a full 33.33 percent, there is a fair reduction of the proportions of both ante and bring-in. They are 12.5 percent and 25 percent, respectively. This makes the ante steal a $40 risk vs. a $50 reward, which is a 5-to-4 proposition (1.25-to-1). This makes the low card's call of an additional $30 a 3-to-1 shot at a $90 pot. The incentive and necessity to steal antes has been dramatically reduced, as has the profitability to call from the low card's perspective.

Compare this to the vastly different game dynamics that occur with a $10 ante. The unique quality of this structure is that it is the first/lowest-limit game that can be played with only a one-chip denomination ($10). Unfortunately, it seems that some casinos have failed to see the importance of minting this chip. A one-chip game does not require the dealer to make change for antes. This obviously allows more time to deal out more hands per hour. On later streets, the game plays more rapidly as well, due to the lessened confusion of having to use two different denominations for every $80 bet and raise. In casinos where it is played with $25 and $5 chips, a three-bet or $240 is most commonly expressed by nine quarter chips and three nickels, but many players might elect to put in eight quarter chips and eight nickels. And, still other variations exist. In multiway pots that contain multiple bets, ensuring that the pot is right while having to contend with two different chip denominations from all of the players slows the game down, which consequently foists a tangible disservice onto the player. Also, the "action" of a $4-$8 chip structure seems to "play" the best. This structure is also the first/lowest that adopts the ante/bring-in/small bet/big bet proportions of 1/1/4/8 that are common to bigger limits such as $80-$160, $100-$200, $200-$400, $400-$800, $800-$1,600, and so on. This limit allows the player on the rise to get a "taste" of big-limit structures. In this version of $40-$80, the raiser is taking a $40 shot at a $90 pot, and is getting 9-to-4 on his money. This is quite an incentive to steal. In fact, it is the largest incentive we have addressed. However, with so much now in the pot so quickly, the low card is also given a huge financial incentive to call. A $30 shot at $130 yields an unprecedented 13-to-4 proposition. This structure is, and should be, played very differently than the $5-ante game. While there is plenty of reason to steal antes, there is plenty of reason to try to catch those in the act. Having to ante such a proportionally high amount forces the player who wants to win in the long run to play hands that he would consider marginal or even unplayable in the lower limits and/or the other structure. Simply put, if you play a textbook-tight game, the antes will break you, as it simply costs too much per hour to sit in that game awaiting premium hands. There is much poker/psychology to be played on third street with this limit. Summary: Play the $5-ante game almost identically to the typical $10-$20 structure. Calling a third-street raise, from the position of already having the $10 call of the forced bet in, gives you identically proportional odds, and attempting an ante steal yields only 13.6 percent greater proportional profit. Play the $10-ante game radically different from any other limit that we have discussed thus far. You must make bold raises to steal antes simply to stay afloat, and you must be prepared to make even bolder moves of restealing on those who employ this tactic. If you are not prepared to play this brand of poker, and have relegated yourself to tight play, you cannot beat this game. This is nothing to be ashamed of, mind you. Knowing your limitations as well as your attributes is a key element of game selection. I have seen several competent $20-$40 and $30-$60 players be destroyed by the structure of this limit and their inability to properly adjust to it. Ratios and percentages: ($5 ante) A = 12.5 percent, B.I. = 25 percent, A.S. = 1.25-to-1, C = 3-to-1; ($10 ante) A = 25 percent, B.I. = 25 percent, A.S. = 2.25-to-1, C = 4.33-to-1

$50-$100 is not played very often these days. A two-chip/four-chip structure, while fine in a $10-$20 game, is simply not the "action" game that higher-limit players seek, although ante stealing is a proportionally profitable scenario. Eight $10 antes and a $15 bring-in create a $95 pot that requires only a $50 steal investment. This is a1.9-to-1 proposition, and is a far greater incentive than any of the smaller games discussed thus far, except for the latter of the $40-$80 structures. However, the incentive to call also goes up, as a $35 increase in investment gets an immediate shot at $145, a ratio of 4.14-to-1. Summary: Be prepared for plenty of third-street battles, but do not overdo it if you are accustomed to the action of $40-$80 ($10). It will not play the same. However, if you are accustomed to playing $30-$60 and are making the leap from there, be prepared to play more aggressively. Ratios and percentages: A = 20 percent, B.I. = 30 percent, A.S. = 1.9-to-1, C = 4.14-to-1

$75-$150 is generally the next step upward; $60-$120 and $60-$125 are currently played so rarely that I elected to omit them and discuss a more common structure. A $15 ante and a $25 bring-in result in a $145 pot, yielding an ante-stealing ratio even closer to 2-to-1 than the $50-$100 structure, albeit negligibly so (for you purists, it is 1.93-to-1). Here is the proverbial rub, though. A low card's call gets a whopping 4.4-to-1 ratio insofar as his $50 required augmentation of investment has a shot at $220. This makes for an interesting balance of power and skill. A 20 percent ante makes for a game in which one cannot rest on his laurels awaiting premium hands, although to a lesser degree than the $40-$80 ($10) structure. However, the necessity to steal antes must be carefully weighed against the value garnered by those who may call you. Summary: Play third street very strongly, while walking the fine line between aggressive and foolish poker. In other words, pick your raising spots very carefully, but not too carefully, as a 20 percent ante and a 33 percent low card will drain your chips if you sit idle. Conversely, getting a $50 shot at $220 as a caller allows one to lower his hand requirements in executing such plays, but do not play garbage simply for the sake of stopping an ante steal. Subsequent betting rounds will almost always take place, as poker at this limit just gets more aggressive than at the lower ones. Ratios and percentages: A = 20 percent, B.I. = 33.33 percent, A.S. = 1.93-to-1, C = 4.4-to-1

$80-$160, $100-$200, $200-$400, and so on, as previously mentioned, are proportioned identically to the $40-$80 with a $10 ante; $150-$300 is proportioned exactly like $30-$60; $300-$600 and higher multiples are the odd ducks, with the largest possible conventional antes and bring-ins of 25 percent and 33 percent, respectively. These games plays very, very large, and $300-$600 is a whole lot more to grapple with than a mere doubling of the $150-$300 game. I see no reason to list more limits, as I would hope that this rendered an expansive treatment on this topic, which covered the range that 99.99 percent of the population would ever play. Most limits have unique structures, with a handful being proportionally identical to others. As you may have noted, antes conventionally fall in the range of 10 percent to 25 percent, and bring-ins fall within a narrower range of 20 percent to 33.33 percent. It is this monstrous variance in antes, coupled with a notable variance in bring-ins, that makes the proposition of changing the limit you play such a complex issue. Each structure requires that adjustments be made in play from either the previous lower game or the next limit up. Some demand only small adjustments to play optimally, while others require radically different approaches from their seemingly similar siblings. As only a very general rule, the ratios and percentages involved here seem to go up as we increase in limits. This is somewhat by design. The higher these numbers, the more poker needs to be played. Choose your game carefully.

Editor's note: Grant Strauss is a Las Vegas-based medium- and high-limit professional seven-card stud player who has played in cardrooms throughout the country, and has earned the reputation of being a successful player.