Online Poker: Interview with James 'Andy McLEOD' Obst on Razz

It hasn’t been long since CardPlayer.com did a video interview with James “Andy McLEOD” Obst. He’d just turned 18 and had come back to playing online poker after having been banned from most major sites for being underage. He final tabled the PokerStars Sunday Million within his first month back, and since our initial interview with him less than two weeks ago, he’s already earned even more deep, noteworthy finishes.

Obst’s biggest accomplishment in the past two weeks was taking down the $300 razz event in the Full Tilt Online Poker Series IX. He earned more than $40,000 for that first-place finish, which was his second-ever FTOPS title (his first was during the FTOPS IV in a $100 no-limit hold’em rebuy event). He then went on to finish in fourth place in the PokerStars Nightly Hundred Grand four nights later.

It’s not often that we can get our hands on an online poker player who also owns a razz title, so we took the opportunity to snag Obst for another interview to pick his brain about the poker variant wherein best is worst.


Shawn Patrick Green: So, you won a razz tournament in a major online poker series, which certainly is not an accomplishment that many can claim. Are you actually any good at razz, or was this a fluke?

James “Andy McLEOD” Obst: I used to play mainly seven-card stud eight-or-better some years ago when I first started playing higher stakes, so I’m pretty familiar with most of the games. And on that day, I just decided before the tournament that I was going to win (so that I would play well; not like I can just make it happen [laughs]), and ended up concentrating a lot harder than I ever have on razz before. [Laughs]

SPG: People say that razz is more luck-based than other poker variants. Is the edge you can achieve in a razz tournament smaller than the edge you can get in hold'em?

JO: To be honest, I think the edge you have in a razz tournament like the FTOPS or the WCOOP [PokerStars World Championship of Online Poker] is huge, possibly even bigger than hold’em. Mainly because there is always an influx of players who don’t really know what they’re doing but play anyway, because it’s a big event in a prestigious series. And since it’s a limit game, they can’t just bust you in one lucky hand; rather, you get to press your edge against them for longer with more margin for error.

SPG: So then where does that edge come from? What are some basic razz strategies?

JO: A lot of bad players will chase down hands starting with, say, two low cards and a medium-high one, like (2-4) 10. or (A-5) 9, which is in general bad if there are other low cards showing and active in the pot, since they’re always having to come from behind against players who know what they’re doing, who will typically only draw to, at worst, an 8-low unless there are an unusual number of high cards showing and it is likely that a 9- or a 10-draw can be the best starting hand.

Also, bad players will defend hands like (A-2) K for obvious reasons, they have the A-2, and there’s a discount! Even though there’s a discount, this is typically bad, except in a few situations, like if it’s heads up and it’s down to the last player to act, who will default raise with any three cards, since you have the king showing. Then, defending can be OK sometimes.

SPG: So, how do you play a game like razz during bubble situations? You still play more aggressively, I assume, but what does that equate to in a limit game like razz?

JO: I think that on the bubble I’m more likely to open bad hands with a low card showing, say (J-7) 2, if there are only one or two low cards to act behind me. That’s about the only adjustment you can really make. If you really wanted to get tricky, you could float a low card’s raise with a bad hand and start firing if they brick on fourth street or something similar, but that’s just asking for trouble.

SPG: Talk about the final table a bit, if you could. What was working out for you there, and who were your tough competitors and why?

JO: The Omaholic [Mark Roland] was also at the final table. He plays a lot of the non-hold’em games, and as such, was a good player. Other than him, there was a very aggressive player to my right [DeuceBuster] who would raise with just about any two down cards when he had a low card showing and there was one low card showing behind him. That’s about all I remember of the players, but, fittingly, it got down to us three-handed. Things had gone pretty well for me down to three-handed, and I took a pretty healthy chip lead in, but then things turned around after The Omaholic made a huge recovery from something like one-seventieth of the chips in play, and we were all very even, and I was the shortstack for a bit. But the other player’s aggression was probably his downfall in the end, and The Omaholic and I ended up heads up. I had a big chip lead, but he made a big recovery once again and had me down to all in in one hand, where I caught an 8-low on seventh street to keep me alive in what was probably the biggest pot of the tournament. Heads up is certainly pretty reliant on catching the cards, especially when it’s between two good  players, so I was fortunate it went my way in the end.

SPG: I was actually going to ask about how head-up razz goes. So, you think it’s pretty hard to gain an edge heads up in razz, especially against a good player?

JO: Yeah, definitely, that was the one stage in the tournament when I felt I didn’t have a significant edge. But I’m not an expert on heads-up razz or anything; I’m sure some may specialize in it and know the ranges a lot better than me and would be able to gain a meaningful edge against just about anyone.

SPG: Full Tilt doesn’t exactly have heads-up razz tournaments going around the clock. You pretty much have to go deep in a multitable razz tournament to get heads-up razz practice. [Laughs]

JO: [Laughs] Yeah, or play [David Benyamine] at $1,000-$2,000 when he was trying to conquer the world.

SPG: [Laughs] Did you actually play Benyamine high-stakes heads-up razz?

JO: No, not me.

SPG: I was going to say, that doesn’t seem like your kind of thing. Now let’s go over an interesting hand that you played in the event. First, we’ll recap all of the action.

SPG: You have a pretty darn good hand here. Is there really a concept of slow-playing on third street in razz? Not that you were slow-playing here, but I’m just curious in general.

JO: I don’t typically do it. The only merit to it would be if you notice that a player has a tendency to call with bad hands like a 9 or a 10 showing for the bring-in amount, but not call a raise. That or if you are in early position in relation to the bring-in and there are a lot of low cards behind you when one of them is likely to raise a limp.

SPG: OK, so BlackJackLeak [Jonathan Paul] completed with a 3 showing. How often are players completing, and is there much of a read that you can get on third street?

JO: There are two low cards showing to act behind him, so he shouldn’t often be raising too light, but it’s conceivable that he may be raising with a 9 or a 10 in the hole. All you can do is really estimate their opening range. Some people would even just raise there with total garbage and fold to a three-bet.

SPG: OK, so you raised and he called. Fourth street gave you a bad king and him a 9, and he led out with a bet. What were your thoughts on that street?

JO: You'll notice that on the third street, there was another 6 and a 2 showing, as well as his 3. This means that my hand of (A-2) 6 only has one solitary low card blocking it from improving in the 3. As such, it is an even stronger hand than if there was a 4 and a 7 that had mucked, and so on. On the fourth street, he was betting with 100 percent of his range, since the 9 should improve his hand more than the king improves mine. It’s even possible he’s paired nines at this stage, though its unlikely; I have to assume he’s drawing to the 9-low, but my hand is obviously still very strong and live, so I call to see what the fifth street brings.

SPG: You get a 3 on fifth street, and he gets an ace. Both are pretty good cards, but did you put him on an ace in the hole for a possibly paired (and therefore useless) fifth-street card for him?

JO: It’s certainly very possible that he paired the ace, although I do have one of the aces myself. Regardless, though, even if he didn’t and has a made 9-low, the 3 was the absolute gin card for me, because it was the least likely low card I could hit, because one 3 was already out. Now, you'll notice that fours, fives, sevens and eights are completely live. So, even if he has a made 9-low, I have 16 outs to improve to at least an 8-low, and 18 to improve to at least a 9-low, which would also likely be good at this stage, with two cards to come.

Even if he has a made 9, I am considerably in front with my completely live A-2-3-6, so it is a very easy raise that many players new to razz wouldn’t know to make, especially when you consider that he may have paired both his ace or his 9, in which case my hand is miles in front. A few people may be thinking that if he did have a made 9-low, he probably has some of the cards I are trying to hit in his hand, which is likely true, but we are still likely to be in front, regardless. The worst-case scenario is that he has something like a 2-4 in the hole, in which case we would probably be around 40/60, but that’s extremely unlikely.

Another note that I would make about that analysis is that when I say I have 16 outs to improve to an 8-low, people shouldn’t instinctively use the “2 and 4” rule in this scenario, since there are a lot more cards already discarded in razz than in hold’em at this stage. So, the odds of me improving are a lot better than 16 x 4, or 64 percent.

SPG: Now, on sixth street you hit the jackpot. You snag a 5 to give you a 6-5 low, the third nuts behind a 5-4 and 6-4. You apparently still didn’t think it was time to slow play, though [laughs].

JO: Haha, yeah, the analysis pretty much ends at this point. I make the virtual nuts and get two streets of value. I didn’t really think [slow-playing] would be appropriate at this point, because it’s so likely he’s paired his hand at some point, whether it be nines, aces, or fours.

SPG: Since you thought your hand was good on sixth street, seventh street couldn’t change much, could it, since you can’t see what he gets?

JO: He would have to have hit gin and have had either a 2-6 or a 2-5 in the hole to beat me, and if he does, more power to him; I’m probably losing four bets, though I might just call the second. The likelihood that he calls with a worse hand — he’ll probably call with almost all of his hands, hoping I paired fives and bricked the river — far outweighs the chances he magically has me beat, making it an auto-bet.

And he ended up mucking the (A-8) 3-9-A-4 (K) for a 9-8-4-3-A. Although Full Tilt shows your down-cards in random order, so it’s possible he started with a king, but I think this is the most likely way his hand played out.

SPG: Awesome. Thanks for doing this interview, and congrats again!

Related Articles

Bad Beat Jackpot Hits In Canada For $1.7 Million

WATCH: Billionaire Hits Two Lucky Rivers On HSP

WATCH: Robl's Kings Cracked Twice For $1 Million

Most Viewed Articles