Omaha Chasers....

goose023 · #1 12-04-2006, 09:44 AM

I'm fairly new to the game - but in my short time playing I have run into what seems to be pretty dumb answers in regards to drawing/chasing.

First - I understand drawing with double digit draws/wraps/redraws/etc etc - and why it's good. But what confuses the hell outta me, is when someone who clearly started playing hold'em, uses the "Omaha is a drawing game" excuse to suck out.

Example 1 - Player A calls pot sized bets on flop & turn only to river an obvious straight or flush and when that is the ONLY draw they had. They say they would never do this in Hold'em but Omaha is a drawing game.

Example 2 - When discussing this hand (not me playing - link here ):
[ QUOTE ]
hi, i usually play NL50 and plo/8 sng's but never plo because it's usually full ring at stars. did i play this right? i was trying to steal the button and i had a decent hand anyway. then i was trying to charge his draws by betting pot on the flop and turn. on the end a ton of straight draws got there so i gave up.

PokerStars Pot-Limit Omaha High, $0.50 BB (5 handed) internettexasholdem.com

SB ($14.50)
BB ($33.40)
UTG ($20.45)
Hero ($50)
Button ($62.55)

Preflop: Hero is MP with 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
1 fold, Hero raises to $1.5, Button calls $1.50, 1 fold, BB calls $1.

Flop: ($4.75) 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $4.55, Button folds, BB calls $4.55.

Turn: ($13.85) A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $13.2, BB calls $13.20.

River: ($40.25) T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
BB bets $14.15 (All-In), Hero folds.

Final Pot: $54.40

[/ QUOTE ]
and my response was:
[ QUOTE ]
You could also be behind after the flop - JT - but it would be a very strange play for him not to raise, considering the flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get this back:
[ QUOTE ]
In Omaha a flush draw being out there is often a good reason NOT to raise a straight. Sort of the opposite of Hold'em in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now my question is when the outs are the same (or close enuff - flush draw is still 9 outs - we just know 2 more cards than hold'em) why do people do one thing for Hold'em and another for Omaha??

Someone please enlighten me.

MHP · #2 12-04-2006, 12:55 PM

Here is the point. Omaha you have 4 cards and the combinations and connecting cards are a lot different than holdem. Omaha is played with the pot limit style- not no limit. You can't blow out someone by going all in.

The person with the better hand is an underdog a lot of times. Its very likely he was beating the bottom set before the river card came.

Another point, In hold em or omaha (at least in my experiences) players rarely make laydowns on draws. They'd rather keep calling PSB's on flush/straight draws to see if they can get catch a card. They rarely lay this down and this is why its best to not hammer a pot with a vulnerable hand when you know they are going to call.

goose023 · #3 12-04-2006, 01:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the point. Omaha you have 4 cards and the combinations and connecting cards are a lot different than holdem. Omaha is played with the pot limit style- not no limit. You can't blow out someone by going all in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is all understood - like I said double digit draws/wraps/redraws/etc etc.

But what still confuses me is when all things are equal - flush draw, nothing else - are people more willing to call PSB's when it is clearly wrong - the math stays the same. Like you said [ QUOTE ]
Another point, In hold em or omaha (at least in my experiences) players rarely make laydowns on draws. They'd rather keep calling PSB's on flush/straight draws to see if they can get catch a card. They rarely lay this down and this is why its best to not hammer a pot with a vulnerable hand when you know they are going to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

For me someone not willing to lay down a draw - when I keep betting is what I want. In the long run you are making money. Now I'm advocating hammering the pot when there are multiple draws, paired cards etc - but only when it is smart to do so - flush draw no straight possibilities for example.

redCashion · #4 12-04-2006, 01:13 PM

If you have the nut straight, I'm missing seeing why it's wrong to keep jamming the pot. If the board is not paired, then you can assume you are good unless the flush or higher straight draw hits. And since you are 60% to avoid the flush, why not jam while ahead and then ditch if the flush or obvious higher straight draw hits? I'm new to PLO, but this strategy has worked for me.

goose023 · #5 12-04-2006, 01:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you have the nut straight, I'm missing seeing why it's wrong to keep jamming the pot. If the board is not paired, then you can assume you are good unless the flush or higher straight draw hits. And since you are 60% to avoid the flush, why not jam while ahead and then ditch if the flush or obvious higher straight draw hits? I'm new to PLO, but this strategy has worked for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point exactly - and this doesn't even take into consideration the redraws we might have.

CrushinFelt · #6 12-04-2006, 01:20 PM

The BB should have raised all-in on the turn. Not jamming the flop is standard (people don't want to be getting freerolled.

goose023 · #7 12-04-2006, 01:28 PM

The orignal hand is not really the point of this thread - its the responses to it - I am wondering why omaha players are more willing to chase than hold'em players if the math is the same.

BUT [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

As far as that hand goes I find it funny that the OP doesn't even consider the fact that he is beat by JT after the flop and only starts to worry after the 10 hits on the river.

pete fabrizio · #8 12-04-2006, 04:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I get this back:
[ QUOTE ]
In Omaha a flush draw being out there is often a good reason NOT to raise a straight. Sort of the opposite of Hold'em in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now my question is when the outs are the same (or close enuff - flush draw is still 9 outs - we just know 2 more cards than hold'em) why do people do one thing for Hold'em and another for Omaha??

Someone please enlighten me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, you seem to have missed my point. If you have a naked straight in Omaha, and you are facing substantial aggression, a flush draw being out there frequently a good reason NOT to raise. This is because you may be an enormous equity dog against another made straight with redraws, or against another straight and other players who have good draws. You can even be an equity dog against someone with a combination of draws, or even in multiway pots where you are the only person with the nuts. (A second reason to just call sometimes, a little more tricky, is that if you suspect opponent has the nuts now, you may want to try take them off the same hand later when a scare card comes.)

In no way was I suggesting that you shouldn't "charge" flush draws. My point was that, in Hold'em, when there's a flush draw out there on a coordinated board, and you bet and someone calls, you can frequently make a reasonable inference that they don't have a straight/set/whatever, because they probably would have raised. In Omaha, you might be able to make that inference when there is NO flush draw, but usually can not make it when there IS a flush draw, since there's a reasonable chance that someone who flopped the straight is playing it cautiously. Capice?

goose023 · #9 12-04-2006, 05:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Um, you seem to have missed my point. If you have a naked straight in Omaha, and you are facing substantial aggression, a flush draw being out there frequently a good reason NOT to raise. This is because you may be an enormous equity dog against another made straight with redraws, or against another straight and other players who have good draws. You can even be an equity dog against someone with a combination of draws, or even in multiway pots where you are the only person with the nuts. (A second reason to just call sometimes, a little more tricky, is that if you suspect opponent has the nuts now, you may want to try take them off the same hand later when a scare card comes.)

In no way was I suggesting that you shouldn't "charge" flush draws. My point was that, in Hold'em, when there's a flush draw out there on a coordinated board, and you bet and someone calls, you can frequently make a reasonable inference that they don't have a straight/set/whatever, because they probably would have raised. In Omaha, you might be able to make that inference when there is NO flush draw, but usually can not make it when there IS a flush draw, since there's a reasonable chance that someone who flopped the straight is playing it cautiously. Capice?

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't missed the point - again, I might be coloured by the crappy limits I play ($25 on pokerroom) - and the terrible play I have seen lately - chasing with a flush and only a flush and not even the nut flush, re-raising a PSB while holding a set and both a nut straight & nut flush on the board (and held by other players)

I'm also not that dense that I don't realize why raising with a naked JT is not that great. I was possibly reading the original comment to literaly (there was only mention of a flush - not about redraws, and that is not what I'm talking about), but that is what brought on this whole thread - the fact that I had seen much more chasing in omaha that I had at hold'em with the same crap holdings - with no redraws nothing but crap. The excuse always seems to be "omaha is a drawing game" - but it doesn't change the fact that even the nut flush and only a nut flush is still only 19% to hit on either street with no real implied odds when they do hit because they are so obvious about what he's drawing to.

autobet · #10 12-04-2006, 05:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I haven't missed the point - again, I might be coloured by the crappy limits I play ($25 on pokerroom) - and the terrible play I have seen lately - chasing with a flush and only a flush and not even the nut flush, re-raising a PSB while holding a set and both a nut straight & nut flush on the board (and held by other players)

I'm also not that dense that I don't realize why raising with a naked JT is not that great. I was possibly reading the original comment to literaly (there was only mention of a flush - not about redraws, and that is not what I'm talking about), but that is what brought on this whole thread - the fact that I had seen much more chasing in omaha that I had at hold'em with the same crap holdings - with no redraws nothing but crap. The excuse always seems to be "omaha is a drawing game" - but it doesn't change the fact that even the nut flush and only a nut flush is still only 19% to hit on either street with no real implied odds when they do hit because they are so obvious about what he's drawing to.

[/ QUOTE ]

In general you will make money with the nuts at any point.

Certain players will not play a large pot with the naked nuts on the flop. Some will even check call on the turn with the nut straight. You need to identify them. I find them a lot playing 2-4, but have never found one playing 10-20.

Against most players, and especially against the fish you are describing, you should be betting and raising and getting value for your hand.