Episode #115: Chinese Poker

MAIN TOPIC

Yes, in our ongoing quest to introduce so many games to our listeners that no one can become good in any one of them :), we introduce you to Chinese Poker, also known as Russian Poker or 13 Card Poker. Listen to the show by clicking here.

Two to four players can play, using a standard 52-card deck. Each player is dealt 13 cards, and must make three poker hands from them: a Front, Middle and Back. The Back is a 5-card hand and must be the best hand. The Front is a 3-card hand and must be the weakest hand. The Middle is a 5-card hand.

Once everyone has set their hand, the hands are revealed, and players compare the strength of each of their hands individually with all of the players. If your Front hand is better than your opponent's, you win 1 unit. And so on for the other hands. If all three of your hands are better than your opponent's, then you "sweep" and earn extra units depending on the scoring method you are using.

There are multiple scoring and rules variations, so be clear what the rules are of the game you're playing.

The game may seem to be all luck, but there is some strategy in it, and good players use this razor-thin margin to profit. For some strategy suggestions, check out http://www.chinesepokeronline.com/strategy.html or http://www.thesmolens.com, which also offers a book for sale for $22.99 and a computer simulation program for $46.95.

OTHER TOPICS

AIPS: We heaped praise on Event #8 champ heffmike, the first two-time banana winner, and Chris, who finally cashed in an AIPS event this season. Check the blog frequently for notice of when the next event, Limit Hold'em, is set up. And remember all AIPS details can be found by clicking here.

Vote for us!: Click here to vote for Ante Up! as the best podcast in Bluff Magazine's Readers Choice Awards.

Watch Survivor...: And you'll see pro Jean Robert Bellande compete against the other castaways in China. We're not laying him good odds.

High Stakes Poker is back: And with higher stakes. It'll take a cool $500K to sit at the table on GSN's show.

Learn to play Traktor ...: by clicking here. Good luck, and buy a widdddddddde screen TV to watch it.

Dead Pool winner is...: Michael Paul, who correctly predicted that Fasso, Chris and I would last a combined 16 levels at the WSOP.

Ante Up! Hotline: Jason from Nashville gives us a ring to say PokerStars won't do anything about a player who types into the chat "He's a bluffer!" to a friend, who calls and beats Jason. The site says it's bad etiquette, but not collusion. We agree, though would love to beat this chatty guy with a rubber hose.

Tampa Bay Poker Replay: We argue about the timed rake that some local rooms use for no-limit hold'em.

HAND OF THE WEEK

ElSnarfGrande sends us a Stud 8 hand from a recent HORSE MTT that proves just how brutal Stud 8 can be. Snarf starts out good with Ad-3s-7d, and improves both ways with a 4d on Fourth Street. Things get tricky on Fifth Street when Snarf makes his low with the 8s, but is sandwiched in between boards of Ks-Ah-Jh and 4s-3d-3c. Snarf just calls here, but the collective wisdom was a raise would have been better.

Snarf improves his low and picks up a straight draw with the 6s on Sixth, and again just calls now facing boards of Ks-Ah-Jh-Kh and 4s-3d-3c-Ac. Again, a tough decision. A raise would be very risky, but informational, so the right play was probably calling.

The wheels come off on the river, when Snarf completes his straight and improves his low with the 5c. He raises, gets reraised and then capped and find out what it's like to be the baloney in a sandwich made of Full House and Wheel bread. Ugh. We feel your pain, brother.

- SCOTT

Comments

[Scotsman420]

Well i have now listened to your entire backlog of shows and will have to wait till a Friday to hear them now

[Gadzooks64]

Tiger Gaming will let US players play playchip Chinese poker.

Gambit, Zerbet, Snarf, Khan and I played there for a while.

Chinese poker is definitely a high variance game but we had a blast playing it.

[TiltGolf]

OK so I was mowing listening to the show and all of a sudden Ace of Spades over and over and over ahhhhhhhh

[Short-Stacked Shamus]

Great show, fellas. Outtakes esp. inspired this wk.

[Chris Cosenza]

It's always great to be the editor of the show. Nothing like showing Scott exactly what he said, and I just loved it when he was saying OCHO!! as if to say Duh Chris!!! LOL. I shoulda played Motorhead's music underneath but I was pressed for time.

[Nikademus]

And what's up with the underwear?

[Michael Paul]

Whew, a hat. I was afraid when you said the schwag drawer was getting low I'd be getting the thong.............

It should come today or tomorrow. I will wear it with honor!

Michael

[Chris Cosenza]

Underwear? I don't know what you're talking about. 8-)

[RainDog]

On the timed-rake, Chris, you're wrong when it comes to higher-stakes games (i.e. middle limits+). It's far, far better to have timed-rake when playing 10-20 limit hold'em and higher, as well as NL games buyins of $500+. Plus, here in California, most poker rooms charge $3, $4, or $5 a hand if there's a flop (that's not a max, that every hand). In general, the rake in low-stakes games is a huge drag on a player's bottom-line, and timed pots aren't really better there. However, when I played at the Bellagio during the WSOP in the 30/60 limit hold'em game, it was $7 per 1/2 hour. This is way better than paying $4 or $5 a hand like I do in California for a $20/40 game, and I pay more when I win lots of in a short-period.

I just listened to the show (been on holiday until last weekend) so I´m a bit late in the comments.
Here´s my €0.02 on the chat on PokerStars. When the player says ´He´s a bluffer´, you could argue he released information about hands the other player has not personally observed and has broken the same rule that prohibits using Poker Edge, if not by the letter, than at least in spirit.
On the other hand, I have seen chat in which players were remarking on other players but the information was at best an incorrect interpretation and at worst intended misinformation (which in itself is permissible in poker).
The example Chris gave would not be subject to the principle of information about hands a player hasn´t observed. Chris´ example was simply bad etiquette, the example from the hotline was a bit beyond that.

Isn´t poker fun :D

[Erwin Blonk]

The previous comment was mine.

[Chris Cosenza]

Hey Rain Dog,

I'm just now seeing your comment, sorry I took so long. I totally agree that higher stakes can absorb a timed rake better than taking 10% of a pot that wouldn't be capped. Obviously if you are playing $100-$200 you aren't worried about paying $5-7 every ha;f hour. But when you are playing $1-2 with a max buy-in of $60 (in Sarasota) or $100 everywhere else in FLA, then I think the timed rake is brutal. Plus, the casinos would still cap a pot rake at those higher limits so I still don't see that being a big difference. It's the lower stakes here that are being killed by the timed rake.

Erwin: Yes, we pointed out that my example wasn't as extreme as what the hotline caller experienced, but you got my point. Don't be so dang literal. 8-)

[Erwin Blonk]

"Don't be so dang literal"

Scott made a comment about many IT guys having a tendency of taking things literally where doing so is uncalled for - it was after a comment I made :D

And I missed you guys pointing it out, probably because I just returned from the French Cote d´Azur (with tons of dreams of hitting it big in poker after seeing all the toys of the happy few in Cannes and Monte Carlo, if only to make that idiot in a V8 Mercedes thinking twice about almost ramming into my car because my medium-sized banana yellow family car would have been an Escalade instead) and I had 3 Ante Up!s to listen to :)