blonde poker forum

PokerStars Hand #114354751363: Tournament #887463051, $100+$9 USD Omaha Hi/Lo Pot Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2014/04/05 21:09:18 WET [2014/04/05 16:09:18 ET]
Table '887463051 2' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: Demonic16 (3645 in chips)
Seat 2: sergei _s1 (2730 in chips)
Seat 3: 1016 (2542 in chips)
Seat 5: MOSANKINGI (3133 in chips)
Seat 6: neilcaterham (3075 in chips)
Seat 7: sleepy_seven (3090 in chips)
Seat 8: filfedra (3420 in chips)
Seat 9: eddieflu (2685 in chips)
filfedra: posts small blind 15
eddieflu: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Demonic16 [Ks Tc Ac 4s]
Demonic16: raises 60 to 90
sergei _s1 has timed out
sergei _s1: folds
sergei _s1 is sitting out
1016: folds
MOSANKINGI: folds
sergei _s1 has returned
neilcaterham: folds
sleepy_seven: calls 90
filfedra: folds
eddieflu: folds
*** FLOP *** [2s 9s 8s]
Demonic16: bets 180
sleepy_seven: raises 585 to 765
Demonic16: calls 585
*** TURN *** [2s 9s 8s] [Qh]
Demonic16: checks
sleepy_seven: bets 1755


I've been quite loose pre here in this specific tournament due to cards/opponents etc but nothing too outrageous. We've played an absolute bunch together and I think he would view me as a somewhat laggier reg than standard later on, however in the early game I tend to be pretty tight. I would say I iso/play pots with fish more than most regs but certainly nothing too absurd (ldo i dont think im shit). Sleepy imo is certainly on the tighter side preflop, and although his range will be wider here on the button and I don't think he is in particular a mass multitabler or anything, I think he will use his position effectively. The SB is a tight reg and the BB an unknown presumed fish.

I think in general this is a great hand to check/call. I think I check/call the vast majority of flushes with a low draw here. I do have a somewhat balanced betting range due to the nature of the game itself, in h/l a nut flush has significantly lower equity than normal due to the split pots. I'd expect virtually every good player to slowplay nut flush and a good low draw, and my hand is nearly exactly this. However, in this spot itself I choose to bet. I have no notes about him pulling some sort of blocker bluff and I have no notes specific notes on betsizing at this stage of the comp. I'm not 100% sure what he thinks my flop continuation range is, but without giving much a way about my overall game, it probably includes just a bunch of hands like this and perhaps a99x or a22x and a88x. Obviously I don't have many combos of a99x due to needing a low card and a suit to make this hand playable from utg.

Fwiw, i tank called the flop raise. He instantly bet pot on the turn. Maybe I'm just overthinking this spot a touch and he always has nut flush but to take such a aggressive line with it is a bit meh. I'm just not sure if it can be q flush too which might r/f the flop or a hand with nut low draw and the As. I'd also be a bit surprised to see the bare ace here, even though it is a very good spot to make such a play. I think in general people call off a bit lighter in plo8 because of the low draws and the overall hand ranges including less suits. I mean obviously suits are pretty important but people like getting half the pot and a good way to do this is having a2 in your hand. There isn't much of a mathematical/range calculator here because of the complexities. I think many of the hands depend on his preflop mood. Sometimes he might peel jt98ds sometimes he might fold AK74ss etc. I've typed all this out and kind of solved the issue in my head but I've spoken to another reg about this hand and we still dont have many solid conclusions apart from probably just c/c and screw balance/w.e. It isn't the same as cash games at all because despite playing a lot of volume with each other we tend to have very different situations and buyins between all the regs.

I'd just fold, I mean he's either bluffing or he isn't - and the upside of finding out he IS bluffing defo won't outweigh the downside to realising he ISN'T. I'd prolly let it go OTF tbh as I can't see him slowing down with the blocker.

I'm wayyyyy too nitty in these spots, but we have two non-nut hands, & I'm pretty sure villain is likely to have at least one of the nut ends. If so, at best, we are pulling for half the pot. Does not seem worth the risk, to me, as I have more downside than upside. Scooping is what, to me, the game is about, & I'd be astonished if I were scooping here. And the value in these things comes from players playing for half. 

Of course, I leave a ton of equity in the middle by thinking this way, & that's what separates the big winners from the serial mini-cashers like me.

Don't be so hard on yourself Tikay !!

Yes, but you get my point. The bigger winners push these thin spots, whereas the nits are more inclined to proceed more cautiously.

I do believe very strongly, however, that much of the value in PLO8 arises because of those who repeatedly chase half the pot.

Kind of, but not nessercarily, "nit" doesn't have to mean weaker at poker than people who are not nits. Often, especially in split pot games, proceeding cautiously is the best poker decision!

Ha, true, but "nit" has come to be a derogatory term for a poker player.

"lack of gamble", which has always been my problem in poker, has upsides too, though. We are less likely to bust early, or win, & more likely to run deep & min-cash or nil-cash.

Just as well we all approach the game so differently.

I know you stated that this isn't a range/maths/theory thing, but that is the only way I can answer it so...

Flop is an exploitative fold IMO. Not exploiting anything you know about this opponent specifically. But exploiting a unique range spot that comes up sometimes on monotone boards, and means that almost ANY range does not have enough bluffs in it.

Reason for this is that when opponent raises the flop he is allowed to have, in fact should have, between 2.5 and 3 combos of bluffs for every one nutted combo. The exact ratio depends on how much equity he has on average with his bluffs. The reason he should have so many bluff combos in order to make you indifferent to calling or folding is because this is only the flop, and he can bet the turn and river too, allowing some of his bluffs to drop out on each street (obviously by the river he should have a 1:2 bluff to nuts ratio if he bets the pot).

Problem for your opponent is that he simply will not have anywhere near enough bare Aces in his range to allow him to have 2.5 to 3 bluffs for every one nut flush. This is due to preflop since he is not calling with too many unsuited Axxx hands - only the really good ones - and these good ones of course will almost always include good low equity (i.e. often have A3 on this flop).

This means that, although you are at the top of your range if the opponent has the Ace of Spades in his hand, this is a funny spot where your opponent should bluff with all his bare Aces and yet you still should not call with even your best bluff catchers.

The only way it becomes right to continue on the flop is if your opponent is either raising worse flushes for value, which seems unlikely, or if he is bluffing with a lot of hands that do not include the Ace of Spades. Or, if he is going to slowplay a ton of his nut flush combos.

I guess if you feel it is wrong to ever be in a spot where you should fold your entire range then you could instead choose slightly better King flush hands to call down with. For example when you have the nut low draw to go with it, or perhaps a set (although you are going to have very, very few sets on this flop, especially not sets plus a King high flush!).

Edited to say: Of course villain will likely slowplay a chunk of his nut flushes on the flop. But for calling the flop raise to be profitable, he is going to have to slowplay A LOT combined with ALWAYS raising his bare Aces. And remember he should also be 'slowplaying' some of his bare Aces to give him some bluffs on later streets!

Very good post stu, same applies to just PLO with regards to the monotone boards, remember our conversation about going mental at people on monotone boards :-)

No, I'm 100% sure its a range/theory thing but its not exactly one where I can sit down and count the combos. I think there are a few problems. One, raising a worse flush on the flop might be optimal, especially if we are folding any non nut flush but sometimes call with a set and nutlow draw. Point two would be our opponent might expect us to go broke on the flop with a hand stronger than a q flush, so he still feels like his worse flush is the virtual nuts. I tried to allude to this in my first post but it might not be that clear. Because this flop spot is so tricky and a hand like mine is an absolute powerhouse then often you would just check/call the flop. However, because I bet and called his raise he might feel like Qflush =nuts. I'm not really sure about this but it kind of make sense if he feels confident I don't bet nut flush on the flop particularly often. Also his pot sizing on the turn is extremely questionable. Maybe he feels my calling range is inelastic after the flop action but I also feel like both that and the timing weight him somewhat more to the ace blocker. That and I doubt I'd see many bare ace plays down the streets.

Well if you think villain is going to raise smaller flushes on the flop then it's an easy call down. It does not matter if villain does not have enough bluffs in his range if you beat a chunk of his value range.

I'd be surprised if villain actually was raising a Q or J high flush though, especially as it is very difficult for you to have a hand like a set on this board (we don't play many hands that have 88 or 99 in them at this game, especially not UTG). He has a decent bluff catcher on this flop with a Q or J high flush, and turning a bluff catcher into either a value hand or a bluff is not a great play. If villain is competent he should be extremely polarised here, especially since it is a locked down board (yes I realise the bi-directionality means it is not fully locked down) and so he gains less value from protection. But then you know how the regs play and I don't.

Btw, definitely agree with you that his pot raise on the flop and pot bet on the turn is unlikely to be good. Given what we have said about how he doesn't have enough bluffs in his range (assuming he is polarised), he needs to be sizing his bets much smaller. That way he can have enough bluff combos since he does not need as many given that he is laying you a better price. And of course if he is depolarised then he also has a reason to size his bets smaller since otherwise he isolates himself against only hands that beat him.

I must admit that his bet sizing instinctively makes me want to call down. On the basis of nothing more complicated than the numpty-reasoning of "why would he ever pot the nuts here? He must be bluffing with the bare Ace. I call." On other hand, maybe he is trying to make you think that when he actually just always has the nuts. But levelling schmevelling. In the end it's usually best just to play ranges and theory, unless you have a strong reason to depart from that.

Great posts by Honeybadger.

I do want to call down though because sizing is weird.

i want to call him down but most likely we will get half pot at best
keep powder dry for when we have a lock somewhere IMHO

how far into the tourney would you have to be to consider 3b/c flop

i don't see how with what you said is your kinda ''loose'' image people wont be trying it on betting all there sets vs you as well as worse flushes

Vs a few players I'd do it now and later on it would just kind of go in with the stack sizes being the key factor. Generally if the 3b isn't virtually all in I'd wouldn't be ever so keen on it. Sometimes these things happen though. I dont think this is a spot people typically bluff and I'd expect any set to call and not want the money to go in just yet, particularly if they have a good low draw. If not it might be fair to try and blast your opponent  out of the pot but I'm not so sure it happens in these games. Sets would make more sense as "bluffs" than other flushes as they have more equity vs my continuation range. Sorry it took me so long to respond.

it's way too tough a spot for me, i cant come to terms myself on whats best. I like the whole screw balance here, because of the dynamics of it being reg on reg, you 9 handed opening utg then being HU oop on such monotone flops your cbet can get ran over.  it could be cool to just c/c all 3?

if flop is a betfold we should check?!...

Its a spot where id often check/call, we have a good hand to do it and get one bet off bluffs/can get barreled by a hand that has a weakish low draw that has a bit of a made hand such as A582 or a495 or a lower flush that wants me to fold a low draw. Check/calling here is virtually always the better play and balance isn't that key because we are both on multiple tables and he is unlikely to be taking too detailed notes about my exact lines in certain spots. I know I dont review these hand histories too frequently and just go off general notes but if he or anyone else does I like to at least try and keep a bit of balance, never doing one thing too often. Luckily there aren't too many spots where my range will need balancing as several spots in o8 tend to do it naturally.