I,  on the other hand,  love these self-styled 7 Card Stud poker tutors.  They let me know what the generally mediocre or poor player considers to be winning play.  Often they’re dead wrong.  But even when they’re right,  I find their opinions useful when fashioning my own ideas about what works and what doesn’t work at the poker table.

Here’s an example of some of this  “correct”  advice from the table experts that I’ve overhead in the last couple of years at the 7-Card Stud tables.

The Setup:

It's heads up play.

First player  (an “expert”)  shows a board of:  (X-X) Ks 9h 6s 6c (X)

Second player shows a board of:  (X-X) 3c 4c 9d Js (X)

First player has been betting the whole way and the second player has been calling him.  First player checks the River;  second player checks.  Both turn over their hands.  The first player has Kings and sixes.  The second player has a busted Flush Draw.

The first player says,  “Yeah,  I figured you were on a draw.  I never bet into a drawing hand.  Either you’ll fold if you don’t make it or raise me if you do.  So it’s a no-win bet.”  The second player seemed to agree with him,  as did a couple of the older guys around the table.

This advice parallels the conventional wisdom in 5-Card Draw,  “Never bet into a one-card draw.”  The theory is the same,  that you cannot win by betting,  as your opponent will fold unless he caught a hand that can beat you in which case he’ll raise,  costing you money in the long run.

Conventional wisdom notwithstanding,  the advice given by the first player in the above example is wrong.  In fact it’s terrible.  Here’s why.

Although it’s true that some of the time,  when you bet with your good but not great hand,  your opponent will have caught his Flush and will raise you, the chances of that happening  --  about 1 time in 5 by the way  --  are dwarfed by the more likely scenario that your opponent will call with a losing hand.

In Seven Card Stud the eventual pot is usually very large by the River in relation to a single bet.  In a typical $20/$40 game,  for example,  an average pot is about $300 by the end of Sixth Street.  This assumes that it’s pretty much heads up all the way from Fourth Street on.  That final bet of $40 is less than one-seventh of the pot.  The caller of that final bet is getting,  often,  better than 8:1 odds for his call.  Think about that ratio,  8:1.  That’s a large return on your investment.

Accordingly,  most players will call a River bet if they have any chance of winning.  They don’t want to take the chance that you are trying to steal this large pot.  So they’ll put up a fight for it,  since the price of calling you is so small relative to the size of the pot they’d win if you were bluffing.

Unless they are truly excellent at reading their opponents,  or they at least think they are,  they will call with many weak hands  -–  figuring that they only have to catch their opponent bluffing 20% of the time or so for the call to be profitable.

Because of this,  the fact that players feel compelled to call on the River with weak hands,  it’s critical that players with at least good hands bet them for value.  Kings Up in the situation I described should certainly be bet,  because an opponent with two pair will nearly always call that bet  --  even with a board that shows a pair of 6s.  Every time they call,  you win money.  Every time they would have called but you failed to bet,  you lose money.

In fact,  I’d argue that you should bet even without the two pair.  Players are so reluctant to concede a huge pot in stud that they’ll call you down with just a pair. And there’s a very good chance that a player who is trying to draw a Flush will get a pair along the way.  He’ll see his pair;  he’ll see that all you show is a pair of 6s,  and he’ll figure that there’s at least some chance that you have only that lone pair.  And he’ll call.  Take that money.  Don’t let it slip away by checking.