A PL Omaha hand

[ariston]

I agree with the call on the maths side of things but every single player said they expected they had lost on the river. If you expect you have lost then why call? I am not criticizing the call in any way because I believe 99% of players make it but the basic maths is you have the 3rd nuts- you either are beaten by the river (ie KK), you were already beat (ie 33) or the guy is a total fish whose money you will get anyway (ie k3 or 83). There are 3 possible hands and 2 of them beat you so just fold and get him anyway. How many times are you going to play a pot of 24k with someone so poor? In the long run it is the correct +EV call assuming there is a long run with this player and you can play similar pots with him again.

[Josh]

Is that not 4 hands?
2 beating you, kk, 33
2 not, 83, k3....
Is that not basic maths?

[ariston]

k3/k8 is the same hand to me ie full (only a complete numpty would stick 9k in on river with either of these). technically 4 hands but I would rule out both of them and fold the river.

[JungleCat03]

Part of the reason why most people said they expected Ben to lose this hand is that most hands posted like this have a tragic ending.

It's an interesting hand though. I think the guy didn't play it well, which shows he is probably capable of pushing 83(maybe) and K3 on the river for value. He clearly felt his 33322 was probably good on the turn, so he will be feeling his KK333 is good on the river and pushing for value would be consistent with the rest of his play in my eyes.

I think these hands will turn up in his range often enough that you make money by calling the river.