Omaha Hand

[GlasgowBandit]

Opinions on this hand folks.  I never played it all that great, but the villain here who I will refer to as "mug" had been raising quite a bit and was willing to call with trash.  in general he was a very bad player, I had taken his dough 3 or 4 times so I am sure I am well in front and I know I want to play it aggressively in order that I get as much cash as possible out him. 

Game #3920457083: Omaha PL ($0.25/$0.50) - 2007/04/29 - 21:34:47 (UK)
Table "Humberto" Seat 6 is the button.
Seat 1: CHIPPPY ($28.65 in chips)
Seat 2: gelen ($43.58 in chips)
Seat 3: LottoLex ($48.75 in chips)
Seat 4: Murrayfly ($18 in chips)
Seat 5: nihilist ($49.25 in chips)
Seat 6: Jin82 ($45.15 in chips)
Seat 7: Kojak ($41.75 in chips)
Seat 8: lietuva ($74.68 in chips)
Seat 9: semsson1 ($50.65 in chips)
Seat 10: Gaffer ($212.91 in chips)
Kojak: posts small blind $0.25
lietuva: posts big blind $0.50
----- HOLE CARDS -----
dealt to Gaffer [ Ah ]
semsson1: folds
Gaffer: raises to $1.75
CHIPPPY: folds
gelen: folds
LottoLex: folds
Murrayfly: folds
nihilist: folds
Jin82: folds
Kojak: calls $1.50
lietuva: folds
----- FLOP ----- [ ]
Kojak: bets $4
Gaffer: raises to $16
Kojak: calls $12
----- TURN ----- [ ][]
Kojak: checks
Gaffer: bets $36
Kojak: is all-in $24
Returned uncalled bets $12 to Gaffer
----- RIVER ----- [ ][]
----- SHOW DOWN -----
Gaffer: shows [ Ah ] (Two Pairs, Aces and Threes, Eight high)
Kojak: shows [ ] (A Flush, Seven high)
Kojak collected $81 from Main pot
----- SUMMARY -----
Total pot $84 Main pot $81 Rake $3
Board [ ]
Seat 1: CHIPPPY folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: gelen folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: LottoLex folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: Murrayfly folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: nihilist folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: Jin82 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: Kojak (small blind) showed [ ] and won ($81) with A Flush, Seven high
Seat 8: lietuva (big blind) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: semsson1 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: Gaffer showed [ Ah ] and lost with Two Pairs, Aces and Threes, Eight high

[boldie]

OK first of all I hate 2 pairs in my hand in Omaha, what are you hoping for? The hand looks nice but isn't all that great. In this case you also have a nutflush draw so fair enough.

On the flop, what are you thinking reraising here? Your raise screams "I have a big pair and can't lay them down". you have nothing on this flop.
On the turn...well that's just awful. You've missed everything and yet you still bet into someone who raised on the flop and then called your reraise.
any three kills you here and you call the guy  a mug who calls with trash. there are also loads of draws out there and if they hit you are beat.

Really, the starting hand you have looks nice but isn't all that great and then when you miss everything you bet into someone who calls with "any two cards". It's suicide play.

[stewart]

i agree with the above post you didnt play the hand very well at all, i would suggest maybe dropping down a bit or playing the playmoney to get a grasp of the game and the hands value/strenths

im not haveing ago at all i had a very simlar problem to the one like you had in this hand when i first started omaha and lost alot of money in the first few months of playing it but after a lot of pratice im not that bad at it now and have made it back,    mind you i did start in a £100 D/C game playing it  not a great way lol

[doubleup]

I think you played the hand fine.  I'm raising this hand pre-flop every time.   

The flop is a good one for AAxx vs one opponent and I would have raised as well - I dont think he leads with a set.  Turn bet is mandatory, unlucky on the river. 

nb - i'm only advocating this line because of the flop structure, on a more coordinated flop with a flush draw, I let it go.

[GlasgowBandit]

I think you played the hand fine.  I'm raising this hand pre-flop every time.   

The flop is a good one for AAxx vs one opponent and I would have raised as well - I dont think he leads with a set.  Turn bet is mandatory, unlucky on the river. 

nb - i'm only advocating this line because of the flop structure, on a more coordinated flop with a flush draw, I let it go.

My thoughts exactly. 

 I outlined in original post I never played it that great, but I am 100% convinced that I am in front of this guy.  He had been making attempts at stealing almost every pot, when he had any sort of hand that was a great draw he slowed down and check called on alsmot every occasion.  I was sure I could get him off any weak holding.  I think his flop bet is weak also, I am generally an aggressive player at Omaha and he is OOP  on the flop and if I am in that position I stick in a feeler bet and I get raised I pass unless I have a draw to the nuts.  When I fail to hit on the turn and my oppoent bets after my weak check I pass immediately he had a 5 high flush draw!!  Granted it was open ended to a straight flush but how often is this going to hit??

[Enzyme_]

Terrible play! ur always ahead then u get bingo'd ! he only had a straight draw on flop and turn brings open ended straight flush draw of course ur aces & tens were not gonna get cracked.

guys a maniac so he could easily play any low pair in his hand, u repot flop and get a call, u still feel ahead to push him in?

[I, Zimbra]

Raising a double pair works great for deception purposes, you flop a set I think one time in four. It can help to hide the times you raise with AAxx or a high rundown, but in this case one of your pairs is AA! The fact that AAxx is a favourite in Omaha against a random hand is powerful if you're shortstacked (e.g. in a tournament scenario, where blinds are high and you can get most of your stack in preflop), but here you're very, very deep. Your opponent only has to call $1.50 to potentially double through you for $40.

The flop:

It sounds like you were a little too anxious to get the guy's cash, when the flop comes low rainbow like that, and he bets out - unless you have extremely good intel that he has nowt, I'd be worried. Even if he calls with any four cards, he can still have 83xx 84xx and be ahead of you; for sure the rainbow aspect is good for you but he can also have e.g. 6-7-5-x or similar. Even bad players can flop good, and because you raised preflop, if you've misunderestimated him (Dubya-style), he'll have a much better idea where he is in the hand than you do.

There is also a huge difference between him firing out on a pot he's raised, and firing into the raiser. I personally would have waited for a better opportunity than this. Even as a marginal favourite on the flop, assuming he was stealing (he has an up-and-down, so not much - but then neither do you, really), you can still get killed in any number of ways when the next two cards come down, and you have no draws at all.

On the turn he has back-doored a flush draw as well. Again, if he's poor, he won't figure the odds of the situation at all, he'll just call with his open-end-straight-flush draw. If he's good, he'll realise that due to your action at this point it's extremely likely that you only have aces up and he is now getting huge odds to call ($60 in the pot, $24 to call = 2.5-1).

If he's really as bad as you say, do you need to gamble on a flop like that where you might be ahead very slightly, or behind quite a bit - and you have no idea which, since he bets his hits and misses both the same?

[I, Zimbra]

... I never played it all that great,

...but the villain here who I will refer to as "mug" ... was a very bad player

Another thought. I said that it sounded like you were anxious to get his money because you had him tagged as a fish. You also admit (above) that you don't think you played the hand great.

Does this mean that you would have played it differently/better if you had figured to be up against a 'good' player?

[GlasgowBandit]

... I never played it all that great,

...but the villain here who I will refer to as "mug" ... was a very bad player

Another thought. I said that it sounded like you were anxious to get his money because you had him tagged as a fish. You also admit (above) that you don't think you played the hand great.

Does this mean that you would have played it differently/better if you had figured to be up against a 'good' player?

Deffo mate, I seen him call off til a river bet and then fold.  I had him noted as "squid" I have even added him to my notebook as my money earner when things are tough :-) I would suggest anyone else playing on crypto does the same.

Had he been a player I respected and though was capable of playing a decent hand then I'd have put the breaks on after betting the flop and let him have more control of the betting.  I could have check/called until the danger card arrived and that for me would have been the spade as I don't think he'd have bet out with a set on the flop instead I think he'd let me bet out and then repop on the turn.

when he checks the turn, I don't see this as a sign of strength I see this as total weakness I think he actuall takes me for the boat on the turn but can't lay down an open ended straightg flush draw.

[I, Zimbra]

If he's really that bad, I doubt he'd even think as to what you have (boat or otherwise), he'd simply play his own hand: straight draw on the flop, call, plus flush draw on the turn, call.

Here's what occurs to me: you loosened up your standards as to how to play the hand because you'd tagged your opponent as a bad player. Volumes have been written about how not to over-commit with AAxx in Omaha when deepstacked; but since your opponent was a poor player, is it possible that you chose to ignore that advice?

Obviously you have to use a different toolset when playing poor players than playing good ones, but in this case you seem to suggest that it's okay to play worse against worse players because they will still pay you off; I would argue that I try to play my A-game regardless of the standard of competition.

If you play worse against bad players, you will still make money, but I would hazard a guess that either you won't make as much or your variance will naturally be higher.