|
Title: 2 omaha hands Post by: deputydawg on April 22, 2008, 12:33:48 AM comments appreciated on way played. especially second one as I was trying to represent nut flush but unfortunately got called by J flush
PokerStars Game #16898550397: Omaha Pot Limit ($0.50/$1.00) - 2008/04/21 - 18:24:25 (ET) Table 'Elpis V' 6-max Seat #3 is the button Seat 1: Eel 3 ($95.50 in chips) Seat 2: King Arthuro ($171.35 in chips) Seat 3: -benWU- ($92.30 in chips) Seat 4: downingtown8 ($70 in chips) Seat 5: gil_27 ($62.60 in chips) Seat 6: hero ($160.20 in chips) downingtown8: posts small blind $0.50 gil_27: posts big blind $1 *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to hero [Ah As 5h 5s] hero: raises $2.50 to $3.50 Eel 3: folds King Arthuro: raises $8.50 to $12 -benWU-: folds downingtown8: folds gil_27: folds hero: raises $25.50 to $37.50 King Arthuro: calls $25.50 *** FLOP *** [Ts 3s 9h] hero: bets $73.50 King Arthuro: raises $60.35 to $133.85 and is all-in hero: calls $49.20 and is all-in *** TURN *** [Ts 3s 9h] [6h] *** RIVER *** [Ts 3s 9h 6h] [Kc] *** SHOW DOWN *** hero: shows [Ah As 5h 5s] (a pair of Aces) King Arthuro: shows [7h 8h 9c 4c] (a straight, Six to Ten) King Arthuro collected $318.90 from pot *** SUMMARY *** Total pot $321.90 | Rake $3 Board [Ts 3s 9h 6h Kc] Seat 1: Eel 3 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 2: King Arthuro showed [7h 8h 9c 4c] and won ($318.90) with a straight, Six to Ten Seat 3: -benWU- (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 4: downingtown8 (small blind) folded before Flop Seat 5: gil_27 (big blind) folded before Flop Seat 6: hero showed [Ah As 5h 5s] and lost with a pair of Aces PokerStars Game #16899447105: Omaha Pot Limit ($0.50/$1.00) - 2008/04/21 - 19:06:19 (ET) Table 'Ostenia II' 6-max Seat #1 is the button Seat 1: shiloman ($77.15 in chips) Seat 2: hero ($94.95 in chips) Seat 3: REDDEVIL117 ($56.10 in chips) Seat 4: Cheters23 ($130 in chips) Seat 5: S.C.E.P.82 ($82.55 in chips) Seat 6: HitteMask ($92.85 in chips) hero: posts small blind $0.50 REDDEVIL117: posts big blind $1 *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to hero [Ad 2d Jh Ac] Cheters23: folds S.C.E.P.82: folds HitteMask: raises $2.50 to $3.50 shiloman: folds hero: calls $3 REDDEVIL117: calls $2.50 *** FLOP *** [Tc 3s Kc] hero: checks REDDEVIL117: bets $1 HitteMask: calls $1 hero: calls $1 *** TURN *** [Tc 3s Kc] [8c] hero: checks REDDEVIL117: bets $5 HitteMask: calls $5 hero: raises $17 to $22 REDDEVIL117: calls $17 HitteMask: folds *** RIVER *** [Tc 3s Kc 8c] [5d] HitteMask is sitting out hero: bets $59.50 REDDEVIL117: calls $29.60 and is all-in *** SHOW DOWN *** hero: shows [Ad 2d Jh Ac] (a pair of Aces) REDDEVIL117: shows [7c 7s Jd Jc] (a flush, King high) REDDEVIL117 collected $118.70 from pot *** SUMMARY *** Total pot $121.70 | Rake $3 Board [Tc 3s Kc 8c 5d] Seat 1: shiloman (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 2: hero (small blind) showed [Ad 2d Jh Ac] and lost with a pair of Aces Seat 3: REDDEVIL117 (big blind) showed [7c 7s Jd Jc] and won ($118.70) with a flush, King high Seat 4: Cheters23 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 5: S.C.E.P.82 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 6: HitteMask folded on the Turn Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: Sunday8pm on April 22, 2008, 05:37:46 AM Both fine absolutly fine.
I like hand 2 a lot actually. Calling pre with AAxx is very underrated. i also like your line post-flop. Shame they didn't believe you but oh well...:( Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: ACE2M on April 22, 2008, 10:04:04 AM both fine, maybe he was a non folder/idiot in the 2nd one in which case you shouldn't be bluffing him is the only possible problem apart from if you been exposed bluffing the bare ace recently.
Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: doubleup on April 22, 2008, 10:21:55 AM Ha welcome to my world.
I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: ACE2M on April 22, 2008, 10:26:37 AM Ha welcome to my world. I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. christ as if your bluffing options aren't limited enough in PLO, you can't even pull the easiest bluff anymore! There are players at every level who will fold and those that won't so your job is to figure out who will and who won't. I still find it very profitable. Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: doubleup on April 22, 2008, 10:50:40 AM Ha welcome to my world. I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. christ as if your bluffing options aren't limited enough in PLO, you can't even pull the easiest bluff anymore! There are players at every level who will fold and those that won't so your job is to figure out who will and who won't. I still find it very profitable. I do agree but in the absence of info it is probably better to accept that someone who bets out or raises with the non nut flush is more easily parted from their chips by waiting for the time that you have the goods. Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: ACE2M on April 22, 2008, 11:43:11 AM Ha welcome to my world. I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. christ as if your bluffing options aren't limited enough in PLO, you can't even pull the easiest bluff anymore! There are players at every level who will fold and those that won't so your job is to figure out who will and who won't. I still find it very profitable. I do agree but in the absence of info it is probably better to accept that someone who bets out or raises with the non nut flush is more easily parted from their chips by waiting for the time that you have the goods. You must be betting out with made but non nut hands sometimes surely? Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: doubleup on April 22, 2008, 11:48:08 AM Ha welcome to my world. I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. christ as if your bluffing options aren't limited enough in PLO, you can't even pull the easiest bluff anymore! There are players at every level who will fold and those that won't so your job is to figure out who will and who won't. I still find it very profitable. I do agree but in the absence of info it is probably better to accept that someone who bets out or raises with the non nut flush is more easily parted from their chips by waiting for the time that you have the goods. You must be betting out with made but non nut hands sometimes surely? Not the 4th nuts into 2 players..... Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: ACE2M on April 22, 2008, 12:39:38 PM Ha welcome to my world. I really am not sure at all about the bare ace bluff any more, I'm pretty sure I've lost a lot more than I've won from it I think that it has greater value at higher limits where the player pool is smaller and you don't want to have a nut peddling image, but I've found at lower limits once the players have put money in with a flush they just aren't going to fold, so the way to play is fairly obvious. christ as if your bluffing options aren't limited enough in PLO, you can't even pull the easiest bluff anymore! There are players at every level who will fold and those that won't so your job is to figure out who will and who won't. I still find it very profitable. I do agree but in the absence of info it is probably better to accept that someone who bets out or raises with the non nut flush is more easily parted from their chips by waiting for the time that you have the goods. You must be betting out with made but non nut hands sometimes surely? Not the 4th nuts into 2 players..... fair point Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: NoflopsHomer on April 22, 2008, 02:09:46 PM Don't do the bare ace bluff on any in 1/2 games or below unless you have good enough knowledge that they'll fold, because most people won't.
Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: chrisbruce on April 22, 2008, 11:08:31 PM For me the bare ace bluff only works v good players who know you play tight. Against unkown donks its just not worth it. Several times Ive bet the bare ace only to be reraised lololololol
Title: Re: 2 omaha hands Post by: doubleup on April 22, 2008, 11:10:22 PM For me the bare ace bluff only works v good players who know you play tight. Against unkown donks its just not worth it. Several times Ive bet the bare ace only to be reraised lololololol Exactly my experience (and also getting fcked in the first hand) |