ITH Poker Forum

[Fenris78]

Please be gentle as I am only starting out with PLO. I think I misplayed this hand pretty badly. Villain on this hand is rather passive preflop so I think I can be farily sure he has Aces when he min 3bets.

Post flop I am pretty lost. Unless he has the suited Ace of hearts in his hand I have 8 outs to a flush, 2 outs to trip Queens, 2 outs to trip kings and 3 outs to 2pair so I figured I could take a card off when he half pots it, even when I discount my outs heavily.

On the turn I thought it was unlikely that he would pay me off if I check-raise, so I check-called with my flush.

On the river I am not really beating anything anymore and I doubt he bets unimproved aces again here. Agree with a fold?

Seat 1: mook*** ($481,95 in chips)
Seat 2: Vini*** ($60 in chips)
Seat 3: Mcpi*** ($92,50 in chips)
Seat 8: Fenris78 ($101 in chips) DEALER
Seat 9: oddj*** ($137,45 in chips)
Seat 10: Mira*** ($102,10 in chips)
Mira***: posts small blind $0,50
mook***: posts big blind $1

Dealt to Fenris78
Vini***: folds
Mcpi***: folds
Fenris78: raises to $3,50
oddj***: raises to $6
Mira***: folds
mook***: calls $5
Fenris78: calls $2,50

*** FLOP ***

mook***: checks
Fenris78: checks
oddj***: bets $9,25
mook***: folds
Fenris78: calls $9,25

*** TURN ***

Fenris78: checks
oddj***: bets $18,50
Fenris78: calls $18,50

*** RIVER ***
Fenris78: checks
oddj***: bets $37

[clabbers]

Opponents actions are very suspicious. What could he have that would be thrilled with the flop, turn and river. He's making large bets which indicate danger, but they don't tell a coherent and likely story. You should review p-revious hands by this player for clues to his solidity, but I'm inclined to call and prepared to be told what a terrible player I am as I drag the pot.

A solid player could have AKKx with the Ax both hearts. This is an unlikely holding.

The only other holdings to fear are flopped undersets which filled up and AAxx with ace and another heart.

If your opponent bets more than half of his flops and rarely checks the turn, his range is quite wide enough to justify a call.

You do have a flush. You beat most AA hands (and all unimproved ones)

[mchilger]

I think you've played all streets correctly. It doesn't make sense to bet a set on the turn, and betting a flush on the river with a paired board is also suspect. By the time you get to the river, I'm thinking the guy has an A-high flush, but as Clabbers says the story doesn't make sense so I would call.

I do expect you'll lose, but I think worth it given the pot odds.

Matthew

[Fenris78]

Great, thanks for your answers, clabbers and Matt. It's good to have great players confirm my play. Guess it was probably mere coincidence I played the hand correctly

I did indeed call the river (remember I am a holdem donk and can't fold a 2nd nut flush even on a paired board ) and he showed AAxx with the nut flush.

[mchilger]

Please take my feedback with a grain of salt - I haven't played much PLO. These kinds of hands are always hard when looking at what a good player might do vs. the average player at low stakes. I've played about 20-30 hours at the stakes you are playing. Although I probably call, I do think it was close.

Matthew

[clabbers]

Half pot on every street. He disguised his correct bet on the turn with the nuts by surrounding it with identical bets on flop and river (half pot) where he was much weaker than the nuts. With the unlikely holding of AKKx, Ax of hearts he woiuld indeed be nuts all the way. With the actual holding and most others he had to be lying on one or more streets, and AA was very likely. I guessed wrong about just when he was lying.

It is dangerous to call big bets, in fact quite a bit more dangerous than making them. People may in fact be making fewer moves than you think they are making.

Possibly we played the hand passively enough that he could accurately rule out a full house for us and bet the river for value. Strangely enough, leading out at the flop could save us money as he would have to fear the full house on the river, or perhaps having already raised the flop we could give the hand up on the turn.

Reviewing his play, I'm liking it more than I did at first. Overpair plus nut flush draw is a very good hand, can't really fault the raise. You will see people make the same play with aces and no hearts, but this time he had both.

I do feel a little funny having Matthew give too much respect to my Omaha Hi game here, hope Jeff will comment too. The idea that he was equally strong on all three streets was not credible and likely to me. The idea that he made reasonable choices that happened to also deceive us is much easier to buy.

[clabbers]

To be clear, good PLO players do get away from a lot of king high flushes when they are beat. This was a particularly tough situation in which to do so.

If opponent had played the hand quietly up until the turn then come out with a big bet, you could fold, as it would be clear that the third heart was a good card for him.

When queen high flush meets ten high flush, I'm not sure if the pot goes to the more aggressive player, or the stupider one. This won't happen very often if a full table game is loose The ace of hearts must be either mucked or dry, and the king of hearts must be mucked or dry. If the Ace of hearts is in a four card hand, it will have another heart 56% of the time. The same for the king. Remembering that hands containing an ace or king are a little more likely to be played than hands without that ace or king, if five people see the flop, queen and another heart is about even money to have the best flush. Once other players take aggressive action when two or three hearts appear, this percentage goes down.

[quadaces9999]

A lot of PLO players will push there unmade nut draws on the flop. In this case he had the flush draw and he was steaming ahead and not looking back. Iw as going to say you were in trouble when he bet the flop and i would have let it go there.

[jmbreslin]

There is no way a passive player is driving a bare AA hand on that board. AA with the nut heart draw is perfectly consistent with his betting. Most low limit players don't use pot-sized bets so I don't think you can interpret too much from his half pot bets.

First, he 3-bets PF which screams a good AAxx hand from a passive player. Then he makes a CB on an undercard, 2-heart flop. Then he increases his bet on the heart turn, which indicates that he's not concerned about you chasing the heart draw. Then he figures he's safe on the river since you likely would have made a move earlier with a set and maybe he'll get a call from a weaker flush. Or he's just excited at his nut flush and doesn't realize the threat on the river.

I also wouldn't be terribly surprised to see something like KKAx with the Ah. Either way, you're dead by the river. Since you're holding the Kh, Qh, and Jh, it's unlikely he's driving a T-high flush this hard. And there is no chance in hell this is something like trip 8's.

[clabbers]

Why does he bet the river when the board pairs? A nut peddler checks, an aggressive player attacks weakness, but the aggressive player has a much wider range for his previous actions. I know your style is strictly nut-peddler, but it's incorrect to project your style onto the rest of the world. You haven't been playing very long if you haven't seen dry aces fire three bullets a half a dozen times.

[clabbers]

True, if we get away from this on the turn, we don't get confused by the river bet. Plenty of danger present to justify that. Against JMBreslin I'm certainly mucking there because he wouldn't push aces without the made flush. But there are players I would call.

One of the harder things to do in Omaha is to get the card you have been begging for (a heart) and then immediately muck to a bet. Definitely a good practice to stop and consider if it was an even better card for someone else, and therefore actually a bad card for you.

I played a very similar hand once in PLO8, eliminating a strong LAG player on the first hand of a turnament. If I find it, I'll post it.

[jmbreslin]

Why does he bet the river when the board pairs? A nut peddler checks, an aggressive player attacks weakness, but the aggressive player has a much wider range for his previous actions. I know your style is strictly nut-peddler, but it's incorrect to project your style onto the rest of the world. You haven't been playing very long if you haven't seen dry aces fire three bullets a half a dozen times.

I'm only going based on the info given, which is that villain is passive preflop. I just don't see many players who are passive preflop drive naked AAxx like this on such a threatening board.

You're right, though, that many thinking, aggressive players would not check that river with a naked AAxx because they know they'll likely lose at showdown. But we don't have enough evidence that this is a thinking, aggressive player. As I said above, he could be betting the river hoping to get a call from a worse flush (which he did).

[clabbers]

Here's the hand I was speaking of

PokerStars Pot-Limit Omaha Hi/Lo Tournament, 10/20 Blinds (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Hand Converter from HandHistoryConverter.com

Button (t3000)
SB (t3000)
Hero (BB) (t3000)
UTG (t3000)
UTG+1 (t3000)
MP1 (t3000)
MP2 (t3000)
CO (t3000)

Hero's M: 100.00

Preflop: Hero is BB with , , ,
3 folds, MP2 bets t70, CO calls t70, 2 folds, Hero calls t50

Flop: (t220) , , (3 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets t220, CO calls t220, Hero calls t220

Turn: (t880) (3 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets t880, 1 fold, Hero calls t880

River: (t2640) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets t1830 (All-In), Hero calls t1830 (All-In)

Total pot: t6300

Results:
Hero had , , , (Hi: flush, Queen high).
MP2 had , , , (Hi: two pair, Kings and sevens).
Outcome: Hero won t6300

I had definitely picked up a overly macho vibe from this player, and that certainly contibuted to my decision making process. It just would have been incredibly unlikely for him to have the cards to justify the aggression at every opportunity, so it looked like aggression for aggression's sake. Goodnight LE.

[jmbreslin]

You can't really compare the two hands because your hand is from a split-pot game where villain's range is going to be much, much wider. You also had a comfortable read that he was an aggressive player, which doesn't seem to be the case in the original hand posted above.

[sourbluff]

OPs read says passive preflop. Do we take that to mean villan continues to play passive postflop?

I think we all agree we can give the villan AAxx here preflop a very high % of the time. What hasn't been brought up is the idea of changing our line. Why play this hand so passive ourselves?

On this flop we are basically a coinflip against AAxx. Flop gives us a chance to define hand by leading with 3/4 to pot sized bet. If we get raised I think we can easily abandon the hand as we are up against AA with nut draw.

If villan is truly that passive he will likely only call with AA/nut draw. In this case we can check/fold turn feeling fairly comfortable with our play.

Either way we have invested less and feel more confident in our actions.