At sixes and sevens (well sevens and eights actually)

Another single draw shocker. It looked like there were some loose players out there, so I put $60 on two tables, but when almost half of that was gone within 52 hands, I decided I'd had enough. Is it just me or has the game changed lately? I thought 2-7 single draw was about getting reads on opponents, executing bluffs, picking off bluffs, making thin value bets. Now it's all about making sevens and eights. It's very hard to win any decent-sized pot without a seven or an eight. Am I the only player in the game who would rather draw one to 9754 than two to 732? It sure feels that way. It's become more like triple draw all of a sudden, albeit the no-limit version which I haven't yet dared to try.

Here are the highlights (!) of my short sharp shock session (say that ten times fast*):

Hand 1 of 52: I get T8654 in the BB. UTG player min-raises, it folds round to me, I reraise him to $3, he min-four-bets to $5 and I call. I decide to draw, hit my straight, check, he bets $2 into a $10+ pot and I don't have the balls to check-raise him, figuring that with all that min-betting he might well have a monster hand.

Hand 11: It folds to me in the SB and I raise with KT974. BB calls, we both draw one. I pair my four but the BB makes 66542 and I take down a small pot. He could have bluffed there.

Hand 14: I raise in position with J8642, we both take one, I hit an ace and lose to a 10-9.

Hand 22: I get 97752 in the BB. There's a limp and a min-raise, which I call as does the limper. I take one, limper takes two, raiser takes one. I make 98752 but I'm out of position and won't get value from much worse so I check and win a smallish pot. The limper made JT983! Surely I'll start beating these players again.

Hand 24: I get T7653 in the SB. Folds round to the cut-off who only has 60 cents, which he puts in the middle. Button calls, I raise to $2, button folds. Mr 60 cents has a pat 98652 and I lose.

Hand 28: Folds round to me in the cut-off. I raise to $1.50 with JT842. BB calls me and draws one, I stand pat. We check it down; BB shows me the nuts.

Hand 30: I get J7632 in middle position. UTG limps, I raise to $1.50, not minding if the pot goes multi-way. Button calls, UTG calls. All three of us draw one, I hit a nine. UTG checks, I bet $3.50, then the button shoves for $17.75. I very nearly misclick call (I was busy on my other table when this table suddenly reappeared) but manage to locate the fold button. I'm guessing 87632 is probably a fold too in that spot.

Hand 32: I get K9643 in the SB. Cut-off raises to $1.50, button calls, I call, BB calls. Four-way to the draw. I draw one and make 96543, BB draws one, CO pats, button draws two. I bet $4 into a $5.70 pot, BB calls, CO folds, button raises to $8.50, I think about it and make a crying call, BB calls. Button wins a handsome $30 pot with his miracle number two while the BB also has me beat with 87643.

Hand 33: UTG opens to a big fat three bucks, I decide to call on the button with my Q8532 (I've got big implied odds with that draw after all). We both draw one, I hit an ace and lose to Q6543. What sort of draw is that? I guess if you must open UTG with that hand, you're better off patting and bombing the pot after the draw.

Hand 35: I get 88762 UTG, raise and get no callers. For once a standard hand.

Hand 43: I'm not involved here, but the five players who are draw ten cards between them in a limped pot. What happens if you run out of cards in single draw? They all check it down after the draw. The fourth player to act had drawn two to make the nuts; presumably he was hoping the last player (who had also drawn two) had made the second nuts.

Hand 45: I get 87652 on the cut-off five-handed. I raise but alas get no callers.

Hand 52: I get Q9853 UTG five-handed. I don't know why I didn't open this. The fold worked out OK though - the BB shoved for $10.60.

All of that happened in 20 minutes. I showed down nine hands (that's a shedload in that time), seven of them losers. The champagne will remain on ice for some time methinks.

* I've got a handful of shares (not many) in a company called Smiths City. They're a chain of department stores based mainly in the South Island. It's hard to say "Smiths City shares" without saying "shitty", which is appropriate given their performance.