Thoughts on this hand
 

Party Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $1/$2
10 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $200
UTG+1: $145
UTG+2: $102
MP1: $250.46
MP2: $407.60
MP3: $200
CO: $53.80
Button: $1020.43
SB: $320.11
Hero: $507.04

Pre-flop: (10 players) Hero is BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
UTG calls, <font color="#cc0000">UTG+1 raises to $5</font>, 2 folds, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, CO calls, 2 folds, Hero calls, UTG calls.

Flop: J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($31, 6 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 checks, MP2 checks, MP3 checks, <font color="#cc0000">CO bets $29.45</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $117.8</font>


The co was shortstacked, and could easily be bet/calling with alot here, and with my repot and the stack sizes behind me, i assumed there was a good chance everyone else was folding. Your thoughts?


pjn

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

I think it's a bit thin. I don't know why you make the PF call as I can't really see what you are hoping to flop.
On flop you have weak flush draw/straight draw where only 3 sevens give you the nuts. I think you can find better spots. The raise will likely drive out players behind unless they were trap checking a monster - in which case you are almost certainly toast.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

ballsy and creative, yes. But IMHO I think you over-thought it. Although there is alot they could be betting, I think there is also alot they are calling with. I like the spirit of it though.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like the spirit of it though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a joke?

Regarding the hand it looks ok, butdont be too surprised if some has checked a monster or something like QTh

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a bit thin. I don't know why you make the PF call as I can't really see what you are hoping to flop.
On flop you have weak flush draw/straight draw where only 3 sevens give you the nuts. I think you can find better spots.

[/ QUOTE ]

To me, this is exactly the spot where you pop the pot with non-nut and flush draws because in theory you can drive out nut and flush draws. (I wouldn't want to call here or lead out the flop with a bet.) You want to play this hand vs a set or two pair. Also, I think you have may fold equity.

Downside, I do agree there are better hands to do this with, like a better straight draw.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

I would fold this hand preflop. You're calling a raise out of position with a hand with very little potential.

Same with postflop. Very few of your outs are to the nuts. I think there are much better spots to semibluff.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

the problem with this hand for me is that you don't even have a pair so you're a dog to any made hand and probably any serious draw. if you had a weak wrap instead of a weak OESD, this would be much more alright. I think there are too many players left to act here, although if you can be confident they'll get out of the way it isn't too bad.


I think the problem here is that quite often you'll see the villian turn over the NFD, and you'll be trying to hit six straighteners or to spike a non-heart pair.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

I agree with shpongled on both accounts both pre-flop and the semi-bluff.

Any read on the CO? Can he bet with a big draw or just a made set? You'll get the pot head up but if he has QTxx or even two hearts you're in a horrible position

I like the play but the situation isnt great as others have said

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think you have may fold equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's a mistake, if you succeed in isolating your opponent here, he doesn't have enough money left to fold.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

All,

To further illucidate my thought process:

Preflop is in no way standard for me. I think its somewhat appropriate for this table though, as i had seen a couple of peeps who were willing to felt with things like naked aces when they thought they were ahead. This would seem to contradict what i say next, but it doesnt really in that these people aren't stupid, they just seem to always be paranoid that the big repot of their flop bet is always someone trying to steal from them. I was confident given the way that the action appears, i was getting called by very little from the players between me and the CO.


These games feature fewer players who are willing to gamble it up with big(but not huge/nut) draws than some of the higher stakes games ive played in. Most people, if given the chance, would, without a compelling reason to do otherwise, fold many of the draws that have me severely crushed. More importantly, except for the one largish stack in the middle, no one can possibly believe they have much fold equity against me, so the possibility of anyone moving in without the nuts draw is very slim. I think this is very often going to get folded back to the CO, who calls almost everytime.

AS for the co, he started the hand with 26bb's, and after the pf action he has the perfect stealing position. There have been numerous situations in which i watch the short stack in last position make a psb after being checked to and for good reason. Any hand he has here is going to probably win what for him is a reasonable amount of the time, and he can price himself in, and he is wanting to bust so he can rebuy or leave the table.


I also considered his stack size in relation to my raise. As long as everyone folds, im getting around $70 of my raise returned, so while my raise appears to be a very strong move with a large investment, it is in fact risking a relatively small amount. I understand that my pot odds arent great, but if im in a coinflip situation here, im fairly happy with my move, because i expect to make up any lost ev later in the game.

This is probably the most nebulous reason for the move. To me, this is a great way to cultivate a very gamboool type image at a relatively low cost to myself. The better players in this game, including myself, get to be that way simply by paying attention to who repots with what, and adjusting accordingly. While the best players in this game will never be fooled into make a truly stupid move against me because of this hand, this is a wide swath of players who will instantly see this hand and say "jesus, that move/guy is terrible." (one 2p2er who saw the hand said that i was terrible at omaha, and shouldnt play) These are the players that i feel will take my winrate above and beyond the normal expectancy, so if i can create a false image of myself to them, im more than willing to take a bit of negative expected value.


peace


john nickle

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

nice post pjn

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

Yes, very nice post. I like the thought process here. It is the thoughts about image that I find most interesting and perhaps most debatable.
I think it depends on how many players are necessarily (a) following the action closely and, as importantly, are then willing to adjust their own play accordingly. I think there will only be one or two players at the table at most who will be willing to make the proper adjustments. In other words, whatever style they have, most of them are extremely loth or unable to change it. Thus your play may neither gain nor lose any EV later in the session.
However, if they are paranoid, that may well encourage some to fold more quickly against someone who has presented a semi-manic image style, as they can't handle or don't want the variance. Interesting.
I suppose the key besides the theory is: what do you think you gained from this play later on? Maybe impossible to answer.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, very nice post. I like the thought process here. It is the thoughts about image that I find most interesting and perhaps most debatable.
I think it depends on how many players are necessarily (a) following the action closely and, as importantly, are then willing to adjust their own play accordingly. I think there will only be one or two players at the table at most who will be willing to make the proper adjustments. In other words, whatever style they have, most of them are extremely loth or unable to change it. Thus your play may neither gain nor lose any EV later in the session.
However, if they are paranoid, that may well encourage some to fold more quickly against someone who has presented a semi-manic image style, as they can't handle or don't want the variance. Interesting.
I suppose the key besides the theory is: what do you think you gained from this play later on? Maybe impossible to answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems the answer is clear. Consider:

Who is more difficult to extract calls from, the random player who is probably checking his email/trying to cyber with some 40 yo dude, or the skilled, but not expert, player?

Who is more likely to be paying attention to the action and hands at showdowns?

(perhaps most importantly)

What do you think the response was of nearly everyone who saw this hand?

Im by no means claiming to be an expert, but in poker when two equal or near-equal skilled players are contesting a pot, the most important skills to have are the ability to read your opponents hand, and disrupt his or her ability to read your hand. In a game with as many possible combinations as omaha, i think the history of a player is probably the most important key to reading hands. If I can scramble my opponents radar at all, i develop quite an edge, and in a game like plo that can be fairly profitable, even if it only results in one advantageous hand.

Think about it this way: This play encourages a certain type of opponent, the typically nittier, or at least tighter, player to play more loosely against me (this is especially true because i think while they probably dont alter thier preflop hand selection much, this image can in fact induce bad post-flop calls). So, who will be in a better position after the flop? We will both likely have equally good cards, i will correctly be reading both how my opponent is playing, *and* how he thinks i am playing, while he will be not only unaware of my play, but also probably be in situations in which he is not comfortable. I think this can result in him making a huge mistake.

Again, i will state that this advantage is tremendously difficult to quanitfy. If all the other reasons for making this play werent correct, i wouldnt have even considered it.


I think there is an additional benefit to making check raises like this, but im reviewing some hands/sessions to see if i still feel that way, so more to come later.


peace


john nickle

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

i like this play. i do it quite often in situations where i think i can get HU with a decent drawing hand.

if i lose, o well, it helps me out a ton meta-game wise.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

I'm not sure if you're right.

Firstly I think you are too far behind the guy's range for this move to be +EV for this hand. This is OK if it's not terribly -EV and it helps you for future hands.

You claim it will help you because the nits will loosen up against you. I don't think this is helpful: you should encourage them to play tighter. If they are making mistakes by folding too much, get them to make even more and even bigger mistakes. On the other hand if your opponents call too much, you should encourage them to call more.

The only situation where you should encourage the nits to loosen up is when there are no live ones in the game and the nits will play badly postflop. But then you might be better off finding another table.

I'd like to think about this some more and make a big post about it, because I think this applies to all forms of poker. But this is my natural reaction to what you wrote.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if you're right.

Firstly I think you are too far behind the guy's range for this move to be +EV for this hand. This is OK if it's not terribly -EV and it helps you for future hands.

You claim it will help you because the nits will loosen up against you. I don't think this is helpful: you should encourage them to play tighter. If they are making mistakes by folding too much, get them to make even more and even bigger mistakes. On the other hand if your opponents call too much, you should encourage them to call more.

The only situation where you should encourage the nits to loosen up is when there are no live ones in the game and the nits will play badly postflop. But then you might be better off finding another table.

I'd like to think about this some more and make a big post about it, because I think this applies to all forms of poker. But this is my natural reaction to what you wrote.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, this guys range is wide. Very wide. See above. Also, see above about the low-cost of this play.

i knew using the term nits would get me in trouble. At no point am i talking about true nits/nut peddlers.

In a game like omaha, in which against two skilled players with big stacks are contesting a hand, it seems like i would rather encourage my opponent to call too often, assuming we start off with hands of reasonably similair strengths and i make correct post flop decisions, i want the tight players to be in there making bad calls that otherwise they would not be making due to their perceived image of me.

I will rarely be making much money off these players by being in pots HU with them and having them fold to a cb. The pots arent big enough, and thier play is too close to optimal. Where i really make my money from these guys, is situations where i know i have an edge, and they should know it, but call anyway. This is what i am encouraging by making this play.

You are correct that in a table entirely composed of players at either end of the loose/tight spectrum, i want to encourage them all to go further towards their chosen extreme. However, rarely are real-life tables composed of such a lineup. As i discussed, this play has the advertising value that is only targeting *those players who will be most affected by it*.

Although, if some random loose player happens to be watching, and sees what i push with and watches me river the pot, do you think i will have encouraged him to fold more often to my value bets?

It should go without saying that after making a play like this, i reduce the number of semi-bluff raises and such that i make. Utilitze the image you are given.


pjn

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

Cnfuzzed, your response is well thought out and you make some interesting points from a theory of poker point of view.

However, at PLO 200, this is a horrible play.

First, you are not heads up, in fact, no one has folded, so you often will be called by a dominating flush draw.
Second, your meta game ideas are silly at PLO 200.

Make it PLO 2000 and I think things would be different. However, I don't yet play that game, so I am just speculating.

Your hands was crap to start with and it is crap now.
By the way, you do not need to play junk like this to get your opponents to make mistakes. They are looking to stack off to you at PLO 200. Just look to generate opportunities to let them do so.

From your response, it seems you really like your play here. I think you may be suffering from fancy play syndrome, a serious case of it.
If my tone is harsh, my bad, I just think it is something you need to hear.
Also, your argument that CO is shortstacked is specious. If he is doing this move with the nut flush draw and an overpair, you are justifying his play. Also, you are losing money to him if he has any set.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cnfuzzed, your response is well thought out and you make some interesting points from a theory of poker point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you.

[ QUOTE ]
However, at PLO 200, this is a horrible play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, but ive explained above why i think its not...

[ QUOTE ]

First, you are not heads up, in fact, no one has folded, so you often will be called by a dominating flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]

Second, your meta game ideas are silly at PLO 200.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ive explained, several times, why these metagame ideas apply specificly to a group of players who i have consistently seen playing the plo200 games. I explained why i think this isolation move will usually work in this game. Ive explained even why i would be more hesitant to make it at plo2000. Your move.



[ QUOTE ]

Your hands was crap to start with and it is crap now.
By the way, you do not need to play junk like this to get your opponents to make mistakes. They are looking to stack off to you at PLO 200. Just look to generate opportunities to let them do so.


[/ QUOTE ]

Sadly, i dont sit in the games where everyone at the table always stacks off to me everytime i have the nuts. In fact, more than a few players have commented on plays ive made, and ive even seen one guy fold. Probably just a freak occurence though.



[ QUOTE ]

From your response, it seems you really like your play here. I think you may be suffering from fancy play syndrome, a serious case of it.
If my tone is harsh, my bad, I just think it is something you need to hear.

[/ QUOTE ]

No worries. I wish you could explain why you feel this way more coherently. Its entirely possible i have fps, but i also have the extra three buyins i took off that table after this hand went down. Fps and results oriented thinking. Man, i will be broke soon, no?

[ QUOTE ]

Also, your argument that CO is shortstacked is specious. If he is doing this move with the nut flush draw and an overpair, you are justifying his play. Also, you are losing money to him if he has any set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congrats on both repeating what i said several posts, and knowing how to run sims. What if i said he folds just as often as he has me worse than a 60/40. And keep in mind how often i said he would fold.

peace

john nickle

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

I like almost all elements of this scenario. The PFR-er is in early position, so only UTG could be sandbagging. As you pointed out, CO is short-stacked, so you will likely be putting much less of your stack at risk than your raise implies. Your draw fares well against a bare set or two pair. Your meta-game points are well taken. In all, I think this is an ideal time for this move in every respect but one: I would greatly prefer to have at least a pair on the flop to fall back on if I am against any kind of draw. But you can't always get what you want.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would greatly prefer to have at least a pair on the flop to fall back on if I am against any kind of draw. But you can't always get what you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

OP has a pair of 6's in his hand. Or were you talking about being able to beat at least one pair on the board?


Tom

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

Sorry, I meant to give OP a chance to hit two pair, which gives him much needed equity vs. a similar draw. The pair in hand is a liability here.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like almost all elements of this scenario. The PFR-er is in early position, so only UTG could be sandbagging. As you pointed out, CO is short-stacked, so you will likely be putting much less of your stack at risk than your raise implies. Your draw fares well against a bare set or two pair. Your meta-game points are well taken.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was thinking as well. I didn't really see anyone else mention that first point and I think it's pretty important. Lots of people will go for the c/r on the pfr, but most of the players had the opportunity to bet after the pfr checked and they all checked.

You're in the perfect spot to force those other draws to fold, tho I think you may get called some of the time by players who don't bet the flop with stronger draws but will call.

Someone said something like meta-game stuff doesn't matter at 200. That's completely wrong. I'm not sure how much this hand had to do with the winnings afterwards, but players will certainly notice. If you can exploit this image, it's great.

Good thread and posts, pjn.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

You're a fish. Next question.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
i like this play. i do it quite often in situations where i think i can get HU with a decent drawing hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, and this is really important to note, if you have a "decent drawing hand" then you really don't want to be getting heads up. You see, "decent drawing hands" quite like having several callers, since their nut flush draw and straight draws aren't hurt by more callers, in fact they help nicely.
Secondly, and this is most important, he doesn't have a decent drawing hand at all. At PLO $200, nobody ever, and I repeat, ever folds a nut flush draw no matter how much you bet. And here is the really sucky part about it, for for the first time in his life, the guy who can't fold his nut flush draw, well he has you by the balls. You're the dog, god how sucky does that look?

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

One of the things I've come to appreciate about this forum is that consensus is about as likely as a Bush-led Israeli peace settlement. Long may it remain so - the forum, that is, not the war.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like this play. i do it quite often in situations where i think i can get HU with a decent drawing hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, and this is really important to note, if you have a "decent drawing hand" then you really don't want to be getting heads up. You see, "decent drawing hands" quite like having several callers, since their nut flush draw and straight draws aren't hurt by more callers, in fact they help nicely.
Secondly, and this is most important, he doesn't have a decent drawing hand at all. At PLO $200, nobody ever, and I repeat, ever folds a nut flush draw no matter how much you bet. And here is the really sucky part about it, for for the first time in his life, the guy who can't fold his nut flush draw, well he has you by the balls. You're the dog, god how sucky does that look?

[/ QUOTE ]

One day, when you start actually thinking about what you post, and, well, more importantly, thinking about poker, i will be happy to talk to you about why, in fact, i am not a fish. Until this time, feel free to msg me your screenname, and i will sit in all your games, and you can feel free to take all the money you want from pjn-fish.

Seriously, and i mean this in the least-demeaning way possible, but i think i put more thought into my last bowel-movement than i think you put into this post.

peace

john nickle

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

Feel free to sit in my games any time you want Mr Big Shot $200 player LOL.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?441975
http://www.pokerhand.org/?439863
(pay special attention to this next one)
http://www.pokerhand.org/?429736
http://www.pokerhand.org/?425152
http://www.pokerhand.org/?424674
http://www.pokerhand.org/?405941

Yes, you are a fish, the fact that you're sat at the $200 tables shoving that hand says it all. You know less about this game than you think you do, especially if you think you're going to get hands that dominate you to fold in that spot.

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

First, nice hands. Not neccesarily impressive, but nice hands none the less.

Secondly, as it does seem that you put more thought into this post that the last one, im going to say "good job!" in the hopes of continuing this trend. Please keep it up.

Third. Well, i knew it was a stupid idea to get into a pissing contest, in that theres no way im sitting at a plo1000 table. Let me know next time you want to sit at a plo200 table, and i will tell you which ones im at. Feel free to pm me for aim info etc.


pjn

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

You lose, please don't try again.

Ribbo\'s hands
 

Thanks for giving us links to some of these interesting hands. They have certainly opened up a few new lines of play for me. However, can you explain the reasoning behind this one?

KJT2s

Cold calling the reraise looks extremely -EV with this hand as you are completely dominated by KKxx, AAxx, KQJT, etc. I can see calling here with a middle wrap, but your broadway wrap looks too weak. Just gamboling?

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

Position. Yeah i'm going to be behind preflop, but i'm last to act and have put 10% of my stack in preflop three ways. Folding isn't wrong here, but calling can be fine knowing opponents loose raising requirements preflop.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

Can you sort the hands any further? Could you find out how much better AAds does than a random AAxx? Because a lot of the value in having aces is that you usually have at least one nut flush draw, but I'd like to see this quantified.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

[ QUOTE ]
Position. Yeah i'm going to be behind preflop, but i'm last to act and have put 10% of my stack in preflop three ways. Folding isn't wrong here, but calling can be fine knowing opponents loose raising requirements preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey douchebag, a few of those hands are really really bad.If these are the hands you are posting to try to seem like a big shot, you must have some terrible ones that you aren't sharing. Any reason why you have exactly the buyin to start on almost all of those hands? Probably because you've already stacked off a couple times by getting the money in with nine out draws against a set or two pair.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

Yeah, that's it, you nailed it right there. Have fun in your $25 game, you know more than me.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

[ QUOTE ]
Have fun in your $25 game, you know more than me.

[/ QUOTE ]

if by this u mean 10/25 pl game, then thanks, I do have fun.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

Nice to know you admit you can't win in the game. How about you go work on that before making pointless comments on my play.

Re: Ribbo\'s hands
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nice to know you admit you can't win in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you a [censored] retard? I think you're best bet is to stop posting on here and go back to playing freerolls lol

Re: Thoughts on this hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're a fish. Next question.

[/ QUOTE ]

No more personal attacks, Ribbo. See you in a couple days.

If anyone would like to discuss my decision-making please PM me!