Uhm, I don't know how it could possibly be correct to fold the nuts...PLO is a weird game though. BB could have the nut straight plus a FD or something, or as a set, or whatever.

I guess Todd really has no redraw, so he's basically just go to hope his hand holds up, which probably requires no spades and the board not pairing, but just from a pure math perspective, I can't think this fold is correct.

I'd be curious to hear Todd's thoughts though.

The Red Tornado wrote:Interesting hand discussion in this week's Card Player column by Todd Brunson-

Day 2 of PL Omaha (rebuys- which are over)

Brunson has 55K
2 Opponents have 60K each. Blinds are 1/2. Pot was limped with 3 players, Todd was CU, other 2 players were the button and BB.


Brunson's hand:

A:d: J:d: 9:s: 9:c:


Flop:

K:s: Q:s: 10:h:

BB checks

Todd Bets 5K

The Button calls

and then the BB check raises to 25K.

Todd then folds!!!


Do you agree or disagree with folding the nuts here? I'll give Todd's reasons after a discussion.

Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

traderdave wrote:Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

Plus you MUST use 2 of the cards in your hand and 3 on the board, so if you have the Ace of spades but no other spades in your hand, and the board comes 4 spades, you do NOT have a flush.

Is it a high/low game?

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:How in the hell do you play 30 tables at once ?

Dunno. There's a handful of guys who do it regularly. Multiple monitoring, macro scripting so you can do everything off 1 keyboard, macro scripting to make windows pop to the front when you have a decision to make, etc.

Lots of people do sets of 8-10 tables at once.

The most I've ever done is 5-table and I thought that was pretty insane, especially when I got ITM into 3 of the 5 and was playing HU on 2-tables and 3-handed on another table at the same time.

Agreed. I tried playing just 2 at once and I found it too annoying. Anything over 5 just seems overwhelming. I'll be he makes a nice daily profit though...

I've played with some people who just can't figure out that you can't make a 4 card flush on the board in Omaha....

Woody wrote:

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:How in the hell do you play 30 tables at once ?

Dunno. There's a handful of guys who do it regularly. Multiple monitoring, macro scripting so you can do everything off 1 keyboard, macro scripting to make windows pop to the front when you have a decision to make, etc.

Lots of people do sets of 8-10 tables at once.

The most I've ever done is 5-table and I thought that was pretty insane, especially when I got ITM into 3 of the 5 and was playing HU on 2-tables and 3-handed on another table at the same time.

Agreed. I tried playing just 2 at once and I found it too annoying. Anything over 5 just seems overwhelming. I'll be he makes a nice daily profit though...

LOL

www.sharkscope.com

search for "rainkhan" on poker stars.

you'll be surprised.

Woody wrote:Is it a high/low game?

no, this is PLO, not O/8

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

Plus you MUST use 2 of the cards in your hand and 3 on the board, so if you have the Ace of spades but no other spades in your hand, and the board comes 4 spades, you do NOT have a flush.

Ah, that makes it interesting. Even so, Brunson could have thought he was up against a spade flush, right? I guess what I'm asking is whether or not an Ace-high straight is really "the nuts" since there were other hands available to beat it? Still, folding an Ace-high straight is either going to make you look like a genius or just really stupid.

After this discussion, I want to ask you guys about a hand I played on Friday night that didn't turn out to well.

traderdave wrote:

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

Plus you MUST use 2 of the cards in your hand and 3 on the board, so if you have the Ace of spades but no other spades in your hand, and the board comes 4 spades, you do NOT have a flush.

Ah, that makes it interesting. Even so, Brunson could have thought he was up against a spade flush, right? I guess what I'm asking is whether or not an Ace-high straight is really "the nuts" since there were other hands available to beat it? Still, folding an Ace-high straight is either going to make you look like a genius or just really stupid.

The flop is 2 spades and a heart. At the moment, Brunson has the nuts. There is no possible better hand RIGHT NOW than his hand.

However, Brunson does not have any sort of "redraw" to a stronger hand. So while if the hand ended right now Brunson would always win (at least part of the pot), he may not have as much equity as another player who has, say, AJ of spades and 2 other cards--that player has the nuts AND has a redraw to a flush. Or someone who has 2 spades and a either KK, QQ, or TT, who would have redraws to quads/full house/flush.

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

Plus you MUST use 2 of the cards in your hand and 3 on the board, so if you have the Ace of spades but no other spades in your hand, and the board comes 4 spades, you do NOT have a flush.

Ah, that makes it interesting. Even so, Brunson could have thought he was up against a spade flush, right? I guess what I'm asking is whether or not an Ace-high straight is really "the nuts" since there were other hands available to beat it? Still, folding an Ace-high straight is either going to make you look like a genius or just really stupid.

The flop is 2 spades and a heart. At the moment, Brunson has the nuts. There is no possible better hand RIGHT NOW than his hand.

However, Brunson does not have any sort of "redraw" to a stronger hand. So while if the hand ended right now Brunson would always win (at least part of the pot), he may not have as much equity as another player who has, say, AJ of spades and 2 other cards--that player has the nuts AND has a redraw to a flush. Or someone who has 2 spades and a either KK, QQ, or TT, who would have redraws to quads/full house/flush.

OHHHHH, I got it now. It may take me a minute or two but I usually get there

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:How in the hell do you play 30 tables at once ?

Dunno. There's a handful of guys who do it regularly. Multiple monitoring, macro scripting so you can do everything off 1 keyboard, macro scripting to make windows pop to the front when you have a decision to make, etc.

Lots of people do sets of 8-10 tables at once.

The most I've ever done is 5-table and I thought that was pretty insane, especially when I got ITM into 3 of the 5 and was playing HU on 2-tables and 3-handed on another table at the same time.

Agreed. I tried playing just 2 at once and I found it too annoying. Anything over 5 just seems overwhelming. I'll be he makes a nice daily profit though...

LOL

www.sharkscope.com

search for "rainkhan" on poker stars.

you'll be surprised.

Really? I thought you said he was a good internet player?

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:How in the hell do you play 30 tables at once ?

Dunno. There's a handful of guys who do it regularly. Multiple monitoring, macro scripting so you can do everything off 1 keyboard, macro scripting to make windows pop to the front when you have a decision to make, etc.

Lots of people do sets of 8-10 tables at once.

The most I've ever done is 5-table and I thought that was pretty insane, especially when I got ITM into 3 of the 5 and was playing HU on 2-tables and 3-handed on another table at the same time.

Agreed. I tried playing just 2 at once and I found it too annoying. Anything over 5 just seems overwhelming. I'll be he makes a nice daily profit though...

LOL

www.sharkscope.com

search for "rainkhan" on poker stars.

you'll be surprised.

Is he only playing tournies? My stats are terrible online for tournies but in cash Im way ahead and it kinda evens out- (with a slight tilt towards a loss)

Woody wrote:

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:

seke2 wrote:

Woody wrote:How in the hell do you play 30 tables at once ?

Dunno. There's a handful of guys who do it regularly. Multiple monitoring, macro scripting so you can do everything off 1 keyboard, macro scripting to make windows pop to the front when you have a decision to make, etc.

Lots of people do sets of 8-10 tables at once.

The most I've ever done is 5-table and I thought that was pretty insane, especially when I got ITM into 3 of the 5 and was playing HU on 2-tables and 3-handed on another table at the same time.

Agreed. I tried playing just 2 at once and I found it too annoying. Anything over 5 just seems overwhelming. I'll be he makes a nice daily profit though...

LOL

www.sharkscope.com

search for "rainkhan" on poker stars.

you'll be surprised.

Really? I thought you said he was a good internet player?

He is. He has like $175k in MTT winnings on Stars (www.thepokerdb.com, requires registration) and I think he plays high-stakes cash games sometimes too.

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:

seke2 wrote:

traderdave wrote:Omaha HE is just like Texas HE except you get four pocket cards instead of two, right?

Plus you MUST use 2 of the cards in your hand and 3 on the board, so if you have the Ace of spades but no other spades in your hand, and the board comes 4 spades, you do NOT have a flush.

Ah, that makes it interesting. Even so, Brunson could have thought he was up against a spade flush, right? I guess what I'm asking is whether or not an Ace-high straight is really "the nuts" since there were other hands available to beat it? Still, folding an Ace-high straight is either going to make you look like a genius or just really stupid.

The flop is 2 spades and a heart. At the moment, Brunson has the nuts. There is no possible better hand RIGHT NOW than his hand.

However, Brunson does not have any sort of "redraw" to a stronger hand. So while if the hand ended right now Brunson would always win (at least part of the pot), he may not have as much equity as another player who has, say, AJ of spades and 2 other cards--that player has the nuts AND has a redraw to a flush. Or someone who has 2 spades and a either KK, QQ, or TT, who would have redraws to quads/full house/flush.

Essentially what Brunson said. He felt that for a player to make this raise at this piont meant to him that he most likely had the same hand AND had draws to a boat and/or the nut flush. So he folded out of caution since he couldnt get any better and could be playing to only a chop.

and add the fact that the button (3rd player) now has a 2 to 1 call if Todd calls so its an instacall with any set or flush draw and his chances of scooping are pretty low.

I don't know if Todd is right, but it's an interesting spot.

I mean, if you figure all the spades are bad and pairing the board is bad, that's essentially like 17 "bad" cards. Also, aces/jacks are fairly likely to create a split pot as well, since it's likely at least 1 other opponent has a some sort of pair + ace or pair + jack, so if someone had, like, AQ here, and the turn was a J, they'd now have a straight.

So let's say there's like a 70% chance that Todd is up against someone else with a made nut straight. In those situations, he has on average probably about 30% since he will sometimes lose to a flush.

The other 25% of the time, Todd is up against a set of something on the board, a made J9 straight, top two pair, or something else like that, usually along with a redraw to a flush. In those situations, Todd probably has about 40% equity.

So I'd figure Todd has like 35-40% equity in this pot, even in a worst case scenario. From a pot odds perspective, it's pretty close to a call.

If you start having to figure in 3-way equity, I don't think it's going to hurt Todd too much...yes, he will lose equity, but a made hand isn't going to drop below 33% equity or so, because even like 17 outs twice isn't going to give the opponents a huge advantage.

From a non pure math perspective, I can see Todd folding here because he will be able to leverage his skill edge in better ways, however. From a math perspective folding this may be marginally wrong, but playing it is likely an EV neutral gamble, and a player with a skill edge can afford to fold "gamble" spots because they will be able to use their skill edge in better ways in the future.

In my effort to improve, I'd like some critique of this hand. Seven player table, blinds at 5/10, CL has around 350 chips, next @ around 250, me @ around 180, everybody else well back. I should add that I intended to play a bit more aggressively than usual on Friday.

First hand after break:

CL is D and I'm in 2nd position with JJ.
1st position folds, I raise to 20 (probably not enough), followed by a fold, two calls and SB/BB both fold.

Flop - Q, 7, 2 rainbow
I bet 30 (again probably not enough) trying to rep the Q, followed by a fold and CL/D calls.

4th Street - 8
I bet 50, CL/D calls - I'm more than a little nervous now.

5th Street - Ace
With more than half my stack in the pot, I decide to go all-in; about 80 more chips. CL/D calls with pocket Ks.

What should I have done differently?

preflop you should raise more for lots of reasons, mostly because you want to make your opponents to make mistakes and you don't want to play a multi-way pot with JJ when a lot of the time at least 1 overcard will flop, and it's a lot easier to win a pot when you don't have to dodge every card in the deck.

when you bet the flop, that's fine. but that is a totally drawless board. if i bet with something less than AQ/KQ on that board and got called, i'd shut it down. literally, what hand calls a bet on that board other than something better than JJ? especially in a multi-way pot against someone who raised preflop. i mean, other than MAYBE 88-TT, there are 0 hands most people who call your bet with considering there appear to be no flush or straight draws possible.

once your flop bet is called, shut it down.

as played, after the turn bet is called, REALLY shut it down. your opponent isn't going away.

and the river is the worst possible card because now if your opponent was floating around with AQ or something or even floating with AK/AJ/who knows what, they can't possibly fold. bluffing a 3rd time is ridiculous because obviously there are no draws, there have been no draws, no worse hand is calling your action, and your opponent has called twice so far.

so basically, raise to 25 or 30 preflop, cbet the flop, stop putting chips into the pot once that gets called.

traderdave wrote:In my effort to improve, I'd like some critique of this hand. Seven player table, blinds at 5/10, CL has around 350 chips, next @ around 250, me @ around 180, everybody else well back. I should add that I intended to play a bit more aggressively than usual on Friday.

First hand after break:

CL is D and I'm in 2nd position with JJ.
1st position folds, I raise to 20 (probably not enough), followed by a fold, two calls and SB/BB both fold.

Flop - Q, 7, 2 rainbow
I bet 30 (again probably not enough) trying to rep the Q, followed by a fold and CL/D calls.

4th Street - 8
I bet 50, CL/D calls - I'm more than a little nervous now.

5th Street - Ace
With more than half my stack in the pot, I decide to go all-in; about 80 more chips. CL/D calls with pocket Ks.

What should I have done differently?

1) For starters even tho you could have done things differently, youre still losing money or even still going broke against the K's so we can discuss semantics, but in the end the result is likely the same or close.


2) Yes you need to raise more coming in from early position with J's, but you also should still be keeping all of your raises the same size as to not tip off your opponents to your strength. 30 to 35 is a better raise. In a "normal" tourney, you would have been reraised by the Kings and most likely been in a dominated race and lost anyways.

3) The call on the flop from your opponents instead of a reraise is either weak or really strong- it's even moreso with the 2nd caller, I'd be more scared of teh 2nd caller than the 1st. (the player with the K's is a dummy however as he slowplayed pocket kings with 3 other players to the flop for crying out loud)

4) You took a stab on the flop with one overpair, usually not a bad move- BUT you had 3 opponents so the chances of someone having you beat is good. I probably would have check folded here.

5) Then you throw out a large bet and get called, you have to know youre done before this point AND youve priced yourself in for the river or a reraise- so if youre going to push why not just push all in here? At least you give your opponent a hard decision with the Kings instead of 2 easy ones.

Like I said, in a normal tourney I bet the J's and K's are going all in preflop at this point anyways- so the results may be the same- but you can see where there were several things that coulve been done differently.