PLO - Bluff? Value Bet? Shove and hope?

[SuuPRlim]

Lot of history with this opponent (15k hands) although I suspect at least half of those might have been vs someone different on his account.

***** Hand History for Game 4850280986 ***** (IPoker)
$600.00 USD PL Omaha - Friday, May 31, 08:40:07 ET 2013
Table Tom Rolfe (Real Money)
Seat 5 is the button
Seat 1: Tladimir11 ( $600.00 USD )
Seat 3: drunkroger ( $717.00 USD )
Seat 5: StpdSxyFlnders ( $597.00 USD )
Seat 6: HERO ( $802.50 USD )
Seat 8: LeCordonnier ( $3332.55 USD )
Seat 10: SammyHagar ( $600.00 USD )
HERO posts small blind [$3.00 USD].
LeCordonnier posts big blind [$6.00 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to HERO [  ]
Tladimir11 folds
drunkroger raises [$21.00 USD]
StpdSxyFlnders folds
HERO raises [$66.00 USD]
LeCordonnier folds
drunkroger calls [$48.00 USD]
** Dealing Flop ** [ , ,  ]
HERO bets [$88.00 USD]
drunkroger calls [$88.00 USD]
** Dealing Turn ** [ ]
HERO bets [$100.00 USD]
drunkroger calls [$100.00 USD]
** Dealing River ** [ ]
HERO .....

Eff stack is $464~ and there is about $520 in the pot.

Opponent here plays good/solid, in the last 3/4 sessions against him i've run quite a few triple barrels against him in 3bet pots and a couple of river c/r after previous street initiative and he's folded to almost all of them, so starting to think he might be getting ready to start calling me down lighter (although I don't know that, just a instinct) I've also noticed him being slightly hesitent to value-bet too thin on rivers against me in some spots so I think that shows he thinks I am quite aggressive on later streets which. I think he can get to the rive with every boat (except 22) ofc and every straight. I don;t expect him to raise a straight or a wrap on the flop as a stnd play vs me, nor do I expect him to raise A5 OTT either, I think he;d (rightly vs me and the way I've played 3bet pots against him recently) just call all these hands, so I think he reaches the river with a pretty much un-capped range.

I don't have a 100% c-bet on this board texture like most regs (and he'll know this I'm sure) but he'll still expect a high frequency of C-bet and he'll also expect a very high % of my flop c-bets to bet the turn again.

[wazz]

While we have the best hand some of the time we're also beat a healthy amount and there aren't that many hands he can call any size bet with. If we bet $100 and he jams we're going to have to fold as he just has it too often, and this is a great river obviously for him to be jamming all his aces full, which I think he can still have in his range.

A shove might fold out AJ or even AQ, a smaller bet (like $100) would probably get a call but I feel the value we miss when we check and he checks those behind (and he might even make a very small vbet with those hands) is counteracted by the frequency with which he's making a fancy double float, which will happen fairly often from a guy we have lots of history with and we've generally been aggro and tricky against (as I assume you have been). He probably expects us to vbet here with all of our good hands like 46+ and probably doesn't expect us to have a wide c/c range. I certainly prefer check-evaluating, probably calling most size bets, maybe not a jam, to jamming ourselves or betting small.

If he checks behind a hand like KK or QQ then no great shakes as he's probably not calling a bet with those hands anyway.

[GreekStein]

ha this is awesome!

he sent me the very same hand yesterday. Now i know what you both had

[wazz]

In terms of considering any bet a bluff I highly doubt he folds the wheel.

Greekstein, without giving away results, who would you say played the hand better?

[GreekStein]

In terms of considering any bet a bluff I highly doubt he folds the wheel.

Greekstein, without giving away results, who would you say played the hand better?

Given his reasoning, Dave.

[SuuPRlim]

I like this spot because its one of those weird spots where I have a MARGINALLY stronger range (basically I have AA, he doesn't, and I have more big Ax's combo's) but we're both pretty uncapped and in terms of my ACTUAL hand its MARGINALLY behind his range.

Does worse ever call, and does better ever fold if I jam?

[TommyD]

Fun spot.

I don't think worse calls, I'd be thinking if I jammed I was purely trying to get straights and small houses to fold.  Now would he fold these hands?  Well from your reasoning you've been bashing him up recently, so his mindset may well have turned into 'I'm going to flop something big and let Dave barrel himself off to me,' which matches up exactly to your thinking of him not raising straight wraps on the flop or A5 on the turn.  Solely based on this I think we can get him to fold the straights and small boats sometimes, to put it bluntly he may just chicken out of his plan when you jam.  We're giving him a gut check when he has a history of bottling out in the past.  He's shown history of this in your description.

You've said he's folded to almost all of your triple barrels and river c/rs before?  What about the few he has looked you up with?  What has he had here?  Complete nuts or has he been able to call more marginal holdings (and probably more correctly versus you) on these occasions?  I think this is key just to see where he's at in his head.

I think you can get him off some better hands, whether or not he has enough of them to make it profitable, pffft think it's close.  Maybe just about yes.  If he has a Ax house well, we're screwed.

[Tal]

Smart people have spoken. May an idiot post to help his own understanding?

Seems to me likely that villain has us beat. Why would he call the turn with KKxx? Wouldn't that be a better raising spot if he had no draws?

How often would we expect to see villain turn over a worse hand after he calls the turn, having put pretty much half his stack into this pot on a paired board?

3/6 is a different level to me and it's fairly likely I don't bluff enough in this spot. If you would triple barrell without an ace, I can't help thinking you would want a better board to bet the river on with air than a rainbow board with a paired ace.

If you check and he jams, this would signal a lot of strength, as A4 or A2 hands might check to induce(?) and a value bet from villain without a boat won't get much value from a hero who has gone 3Bet/Bet/Bet/Check.

As ever, thanks for your patience

[SuuPRlim]

Seems to me likely that villain has us beat. Why would he call the turn with KKxx? Wouldn't that be a better raising spot if he had no draws?

It is VERY possible that we're beaten here, I believe that our opponent can make it to the river as played with ALL straight and ALL full houses, so yh, very possible he has a better hand, it's not unlikely that we're winning though, he's going to call all Axxx hands OTF, and he will call them all again OTT, AJT8/AQJ7 and such hands (spesh if he picks up some hearts with it)

He doesn't have KK ever hardly, it would be a terrible call OTF with bare KK unless he had 46/47/67 and a BD fd with it (I have the remember) even OTT when the A pairs he cant really call again with KK all that often cos my range has lots of A's in it. This ISN'T really a spot that he should be bluffing OTT all that often, he doesn't need a bluffing range really here because my range is so strong that nearly his entire range can just bluff-catch against me.

How often would we expect to see villain turn over a worse hand after he calls the turn, having put pretty much half his stack into this pot on a paired board?

3/6 is a different level to me and it's fairly likely I don't bluff enough in this spot. If you would triple barrell without an ace, I can't help thinking you would want a better board to bet the river on with air than a rainbow board with a paired ace.

This is an interesting spot because vs an uncapped range its very very risky to bluff without an ACE in my hand, but if I have AK...how much am i really bluffing? I think it's a kind of MERGE spot, meaning I could very feasibly get folds from straights and the same hand, or I might get calls from the slightly worse A*** hands... Wether this is optimistic FPS thinking or not I have no idea.

The next point is, if i decide not to jam, then what the hell do I do? chk/call, chk/fold?

If you check and he jams, this would signal a lot of strength, as A4 or A2 hands might check to induce(?) and a value bet from villain without a boat won't get much value from a hero who has gone 3Bet/Bet/Bet/Check.

As ever, thanks for your patience

Well...this is an interesting point, I think it's a spot where he won't have many bluffs at all - so if he's deciding not to bluff then he doesn't need to Value-bet anything, small boats, straights, anything, can just chk his entire range (obviously he'll want to exploitatively jam A5 and A3 as those are the nuts) however, if he decides he wants to be bluffing here ever then I guess he should jam all straights for value - speshly as I could very feasibly call with just an ACE.

What combo's he gets to the river with that wanna bluff though I'm not sure - perhaps anything that can't beat AK he would wanna bluff with?

Basically what happened was I didn't really know what to do, I was IN LOVE with shoving, but hated the idea of i) chking and HIM jamming (i'd not know what to do, prolly fold) and ii) him checking back and winning with a wheel, if he might have folded it. I then thought well there's half a chance he'll call a WORSE Ace (I don't have many boats or straights really) and half a chance he'll fold the same hand, or maybe the wheel so I figured Jamming was the play....

I dont think he'd fold a straight all that often to be totally honest, I figured he is MUCH more likely to call worse, than to fold better...

I DON'T REALLY know though, is the answer...

[Tal]

Thanks for that answer. Very grateful for the time you've taken to explain.

[SuuPRlim]

sorry I couldn't be more conclusive! I basically reached at Jamming as the option because I disliked chk/call and chk/folding.

Checking and calling felt like it let all his weaker ACE hands off lightly (they can just chk/back and try win) whilst allowing him the pleasure of value-betting nicely against me, Checking and folding sort of felt like he could just go all in with everything and make me life quite unpleasant.

I just felt that going all in would put him in the worst spot, the most often - If I jam, and he spend 13seconds hovering between call and fold buttons then I feel like I win because I've made him guess - there's a lot to be said for just putting your opponent in the toughest spots you can, makes you harder to play against and people are more reticent to tangle with you.

[Honeybadger]

Feels like one of those spots where you should 'value bet', whilst hoping not to be called.

[Tal]

What did you do differently in this hand than you would have done:

a) against a stronger opponent
b) against a much weaker opponent
c) with a much deeper stack?

[TommyD]

sorry I couldn't be more conclusive! I basically reached at Jamming as the option because I disliked chk/call and chk/folding.

Checking and calling felt like it let all his weaker ACE hands off lightly (they can just chk/back and try win) whilst allowing him the pleasure of value-betting nicely against me, Checking and folding sort of felt like he could just go all in with everything and make me life quite unpleasant.

I just felt that going all in would put him in the worst spot, the most often - If I jam, and he spend 13seconds hovering between call and fold buttons then I feel like I win because I've made him guess - there's a lot to be said for just putting your opponent in the toughest spots you can, makes you harder to play against and people are more reticent to tangle with you.

Agree with this completely.

Out of the other options I think Check/call is the worst.  Yes I don't know your dynamics and history to the depth you do from the lines in the OP but it just feels like we'd be spewing more than being right.

I still think we should be thinking we are bluffing and on the odd occasion they call with worse we can say 'Fuck me, I was ahead, pleasing.'

[wazz]

sorry I couldn't be more conclusive! I basically reached at Jamming as the option because I disliked chk/call and chk/folding.

Checking and calling felt like it let all his weaker ACE hands off lightly (they can just chk/back and try win) whilst allowing him the pleasure of value-betting nicely against me, Checking and folding sort of felt like he could just go all in with everything and make me life quite unpleasant.

I just felt that going all in would put him in the worst spot, the most often - If I jam, and he spend 13seconds hovering between call and fold buttons then I feel like I win because I've made him guess - there's a lot to be said for just putting your opponent in the toughest spots you can, makes you harder to play against and people are more reticent to tangle with you.

I don't think he has that many bare ace hands.

While it's good to put our opponents in tough spots, there are times when we can't do anything but give our opponent an easy spot, and times when going out of our way to give our opponent a tough spot isn't the most profitable line. The guys who give their opponents the toughest spots aren't generally the guys who go home with the most money.

I think this is a good example of that. Let's say that most of his range is hands where jamming gives him a tough spot - AJ-AK and the wheel - and that a small fraction of the time he has nothing and that a small fraction of the time he has the nut straight or better. The fact that we're giving him a tough spot with some of his range doesn't make up for the fact that we're massively value-towning ourselves from time to time, as well as letting him off the hook for a river bluff.

I also think it's mostly just hopeful that we can get him to fold better or call worse. There are times that having blockers to certain hands can allow that to happen but against a good/solid opponent as described it seems unlikely.

The value we miss vs AQ and AJ - which don't constitute very many hands - is surely made up for by the frequency he's running a double float, and the possibility of him saving us money by betting less than all-in when he does have it.