PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

No reads, b2b = 2* BI, I sat down because the bigstack is an unknown. On the river he pushes in like 1 sec.

What do U think we should do and how do u like the way I played the hand?


Game # 686415932 - Omaha High Pot Limit EUR 3/6 - Table "Husavik"

Players(max 6):
K1Lube (EUR 4,478.55 in seat 4)
Hero (EUR 1,200.00 in seat 5)
luomoombra (EUR 309.90 in seat 6)

Dealer: luomoombra
Small Blind: K1Lube (3.00)
Big Blind: Hero (6.00)

Hero was dealt: 2[d] - 4[d] - J[h] - J[d]

luomoombra Fold
K1Lube Raise (15.00)
Hero Call (12.00)

Flop 3[d] - T[s] - 8[d]

K1Lube Bet (36.00)
Hero Call (36.00)

Turn 3[d] - T[s] - 8[d] - 9[h]

K1Lube Bet (108.00)
Hero Raise (432.00)
K1Lube Call (324.00)

River 3[d] - T[s] - 8[d] - 9[h] - 6[d]

K1Lube Bet (972.00)
Hero ????

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

Looks like a fold on the river.
I'm not a huge fan of preflop, which leads to meh flop and turn spots, on the flop its just some dirty outs. Difficult spot now knowing how aggressive the big stack is.
And turn its prolly closer to fold than call/raise since he is an unknown.
Dont get me wrong I can see why you played the hand the way you did. Its just that early on you might want to stick to abc for a while to establish and pick up something before putting yourself in difficult marginal spots. Right?

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

Why are you raising this turn...an unorthodox semi-bluff w/a weak draw or are you representing a made straight?

As played, call the river.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

turn raise is good.. actuelly pretty std..

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

btw i fold river.. without any better reads

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I call without reads always. When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff and you get great pot odds. I put villain on a set + naked ace or a low-end straight + naked ace.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I like the way you played this. Sometimes I raise the flop to 'find out where you are' (more just to get some more $ in where we have a perceived edge). I love the turn raise. On the river, given we've raised the turn, we almost have to call readless.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
I call without reads always. When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff and you get great pot odds. I put villain on a set + naked ace or a low-end straight + naked ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of your logic of why this is almost always a naked ace bluff. Is it a math thing? If so could you please explain it to me - I feel kind of stupid. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

I love the turn raise, although I'm not sure about the river. What specific hands is villain calling that turn raise and then pushing river with? The most obvious hands that come to mind are something like NFD + maybe 2 pair or something or naked ace + set. The bare straight is also an option if opponent isn't going to three-bet that with the risk of being freerolled in a 400BB pot, which seems very possible.

I guess if we don't have any reads, I think it largely comes down to what the 'standard' range of an unknown calling the turn raise is.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
turn raise is good.. actuelly pretty std..

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain, as I'm still not sure what it accomplishes.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

Fold flop is standard, if u dont think about taking it away later, then raising turn is ok, if u follow up, on river you have a bluffcatcher (sets top2 bad str8, but v rarely worse flush) for a big bet in a 3handed game. Not many villians are capable of such moves, so i think its a fold, even calling cant be that big mistake. Esp cause you are repping str8 and i think big stack is more likely to mess around here.

Still i like fold best, waiting too see if he can showe up with bluffs and also huge ones. Finding bether spot later.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I think you played it well and should fold the river against unknown.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I don't think folding the flop should be standard: you have an overpair and a flush draw, even if they are both weak. It's possible you have the best hand, the best draw, and the best position. Of course you should play with him at least occasionally on later streets without the nuts, if that is what you mean by "taking it away later".

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you played it well and should fold the river against unknown.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, I like all streets (the turn raise is very nice and something I've started to incorporate more into my game against people that actually fold), but this river is probably a fold.

It's possible that he's floating and trying to rep any diamond/board pair, but I don't know that he'd be doing this without a read on you.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

Misread, flop is standard call, esp in position. Was thinking flop was rainbow and we turned flushdraw.

If flop was rainbow, i think part of reason to call flop there is to start repping hands if we feel we have to.

And we cant fold every time there on a smal site where we most likely are go play alot vs villian, but to max ev in this hand only i think fold is best.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I call without reads always. When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff and you get great pot odds. I put villain on a set + naked ace or a low-end straight + naked ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of your logic of why this is almost always a naked ace bluff. Is it a math thing? If so could you please explain it to me - I feel kind of stupid. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

We get something like 1:2.7 or so on our money, so the call should be righ only ~30% of the time to be profitable. We have 3 diamonds in our hand and there is three in the board. Also villain could be valuebetting worse diamonds, we have Jd. Call without reads. We have enough left on the river for villain to think that big bet puts our hand to the muck. If we had less than $400 left, I´d consider folding way more often.

Also if this flop would have been seen 3-ways, I´d consider folding much more often.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I don't mind the flop call. I think that since HERO is willing to rep other hands and bluff/semi bluff various turns and/or rivers then calling this flop is more than fine. If HERO wasn't planning on bluffing at all and just wanted to play his hand for what it was then I can see folding the flop.

Turn raise is nice and makes it very hard for opponent to call with many hands. Even if he calls (which he did) we still have outs and are deep enough to bluff again on river if need be. Unfortunately HERO actually hits his flush but it looks like the opponent hit a larger one so the river is a fold imo. I really doubt the opponent calls this turn raise to turn any sort of non flush hand into a bluff, so think the river is a pretty easy and standard fold.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

You played it well preflop/flop/turn. You have to raise turn once youve called the flop.
Which site was this on? This is something i usually take into consideration.

Vs a competent player i do think its a pretty easy fold, but since hes unknown makes it a little more difficult. He should only be showing up here with set/3 pair and a high flush draw to make the turn call.
However, since we dont know how he would play lower flushes/missed houses, etc a call isn't so bad. Im would also rule out the bare A, unless with a set. Not many people are going to call so much just to bluff the river when a diamond does appear. I also assume unknowns don't bluff the naked A.

Still think i just lean towards folding due to the instant push.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

I tankede down and called, he showed to my surprsie a naked QJxx... Hmm

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

He was thinking u had same hand on turn, and wanted u off the split probarly, or he was just confused.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

For starters, I'd raise the flop here pretty much always. You've got a much better than average hand HU and villain's likely betting his whole range. I think doing that makes the hand play a lot easier. As played, I think the turn raise is super standard.

River's a really tough decision; a lot of it depends on how your site plays. On Stars at 5/10, an insta-pot is the nuts a ton and I'd probably fold. On Bodog, it might be a call. Again, any read would be super helpful. It's close enough that I really can't say having not played on your site.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

@Blopp

I think that as well, a super nice move IMO

@Iggy

Hate a flop raise bc we have to fold to a 3 bet and would hate to build a pot with such a marginal hand, would like to protect my stack instead!

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

How often do you think villain's 3-betting here? If he 3-bets this flop with sets only (a pretty reasonable range this deep), it's probably about 5% of his range. Unless he's super-aggro, I wouldn't worry too much. Even if he does, you usually have 10 outs in position. I wouldn't fold to a 3-bet here anyway.

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I call without reads always. When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff and you get great pot odds. I put villain on a set + naked ace or a low-end straight + naked ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of your logic of why this is almost always a naked ace bluff. Is it a math thing? If so could you please explain it to me - I feel kind of stupid. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

We get something like 1:2.7 or so on our money, so the call should be righ only ~30% of the time to be profitable. We have 3 diamonds in our hand and there is three in the board. Also villain could be valuebetting worse diamonds, we have Jd. Call without reads. We have enough left on the river for villain to think that big bet puts our hand to the muck. If we had less than $400 left, I´d consider folding way more often.

Also if this flop would have been seen 3-ways, I´d consider folding much more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I obviously understand the question of pot-odds, but was asking if there was maths to prove that "When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff" or is it just the fact that we have three diamonds and there are three diamonds on the board? Obviously that makes it less likely that he has any diamonds, but why is it almost always a naked ace bluff compared to the nut flush?

Re: PLO 3/6, semi deep, river
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I call without reads always. When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff and you get great pot odds. I put villain on a set + naked ace or a low-end straight + naked ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of your logic of why this is almost always a naked ace bluff. Is it a math thing? If so could you please explain it to me - I feel kind of stupid. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

We get something like 1:2.7 or so on our money, so the call should be righ only ~30% of the time to be profitable. We have 3 diamonds in our hand and there is three in the board. Also villain could be valuebetting worse diamonds, we have Jd. Call without reads. We have enough left on the river for villain to think that big bet puts our hand to the muck. If we had less than $400 left, I´d consider folding way more often.

Also if this flop would have been seen 3-ways, I´d consider folding much more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I obviously understand the question of pot-odds, but was asking if there was maths to prove that "When you have 3 diamonds, this is almost always naked ace bluff" or is it just the fact that we have three diamonds and there are three diamonds on the board? Obviously that makes it less likely that he has any diamonds, but why is it almost always a naked ace bluff compared to the nut flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

You just said it yourself - there´s already 6 diamonds out there, and this is HU situation post-flop, so mathematically it is not very likely that villain has two diamonds. If he is willing to bet that river big, it´s usually Ad as a bluff, this time it was air.