How to beat PLO25

[Silent A]

The primary problem with bluffing at PLO25 and lower is that players are so loose that 5 or 6 players will often see the flop and they're often willing to call you down with rather marginal hands. These two tendencies together make it difficult to pull off most bluffs often enough to make any money with them.

The following is not meant for PLO experts, who obviously know how to bluff effectively in PLO, but for low level newbies who would like to take advantage of the tendency of many PLO players to give you credit for what you're representing. Much of it is fairly basic "Theory of Poker"/game theory stuff.

NOTE: This is all off the top of my head, so it's probably far from complete. One of the main reasons I'm putting this out there is to hopefully get some constructive feedback.

The probability of a sucessfull bluff greatly depends on these factors:

1) Position
2) Number of players still in play and left to act
3) The texture of the board
4) Stack sizes of you and/or your opponents
5) Who raised pre-flop and your position relative to him
6) How you have played the hand so far (particularily on the turn and river)
7) Your table image and your opponent's table image

1) Position
The most basic bluff in PLO is a 1/2 to full pot bet when it's checked to you in last position on the flop. Another comon bluff is when everyone checks the flop and the turn comes up a brick. Those players in early position now have a chance to represent a failed check-raise attempt by potting immediately.

2) Number of players in play and left to act
It is important to realize that the chances of a bluff succeeding decreases almost exponentially with the number of opponents still in play. Also, if you're in middle to late (but not last) position, the reason no one has bet so far may well be because someone still to act has the nuts. Remember this whenever you consider making a bluff.

Bluffing is by far the most effective heads-up on boards where it's relatively easy for your opponent to give you credit for a superior hand. Flush boards and paired boards are usually the best. Also keep in mind that few players at PLO25 are sophisticated enough to try a bluff-raise (and even if they are, they probably assume you're not sophisticated enough to bluff in the first place so they won't try it very often anyway).

3) Texture of the board
When you bluff you're trying to represent a strong made hand. This works best when the number of potential draws is minimized. Probably the worst time to try a bluff is on a board like 589 with two suits. Someone will usually call you here so you will probably be forced to play it fast to the end hoping it will come brick-brick (and there aren't may ways you can expect two bricks to fall).

Another example of a poor time to bluff is on a paired board against many opponents. The odds that nobody has at least trips is much too small if you're against 4 or more players. However, this bluff works extremely well gainst 2 or heads up. The same applies to flush boards and (to a lesser extent) made straights on a rainbow board.

A related concept is betting scare cards (when a card comes that completes a flush, straight, or pairs the board on what was previously a straight or flush board). Since so many players (even the winning ones) play weak-tight ABC poker at these levels it is often fairly obvious when they're drawing and when they have a big hand. These same players also tend to give you credit for having all the draws covered. The primary defence against this bluff is to play well co-ordinated hands and bet your draws as strong as your made hands.

4) Stack sizes
Bluffs work best when everyone is fairly deep stacked relative to the current pot, but not so deep that they have excellent implied odds (or it's so cheap to call that they almost don't care). If there's a short stack at the tale (especially if it's you) bluffing loses much of its appeal.

5) Pre-flop raiser and relative position
The pre-flop raiser will often be credited for having AA/KK no matter what their actual tendencies are. If you raised without AA, it's often in your interest to play as if you have AA when flop suits a hand like AA well (i.e. an A high flop or when the board features low cards with a pair, like 733). Also, it's more risky to bluff after the pre-flop raiser has checked to you since someone one in early position could well be looking to make a check-raise.

6) How you're played the hand so far
It is absolutely vital that the way you've played the hand so far be consistent with what you're representing. This is particularily true on the turn and especially the river.

The Rempel recently posted a hand in which his opponent made the blunder of bluffing on a straight board when it was obvious nobody had the nuts. The mistake was that, given how he had played his hand to that point, it was obvious that he didn't have the nuts either. you can only get away with this against the most unimaginative of nitty players.

7) Your table image and your opponent's table image
For obvious reasons, bluffs work best if you have the image of being a tight player and you're playing against other tight players. The correct balance between bluffs and nut peddling is dificult to quantify. Probably the easiest way to identify if you bluff often enough (or to rarely) is to note those situations where you were tempted to try a bluff, but chickened out. If the ammount of money you would have won by bluffing more is significantly greater than what you would have lost then lean towards bluffing when you're unsure.

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
PREFLOP TIGHTNESS
... Playing more hands increases variance (for me), and often I start at 30 and drift to 40-50 especially if I have a mark in my site. So if I start at 20 then often I might move to 30. And I find that when I start playing 20-30% type of hands with danglers and low pairs, I start to get myself in trouble - it also leads to harder decisions, i.e. does this donkey really have top set this time? So in summary, I agree you can play at 30% and win, it just makes it more difficult and I have no information that it increases my winrate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forgot to reply to this. One of the primary reasons to play marginal hands is to enhance the action you get with your better hands. In fact, it's often in your interest to play some -EV hands if this loosens up your image enough to earn you more +EV on your bigger hands. A similar (and probably significantly stronger) agrument can be made for raising with some -EV hands since this can dramatically increase the action you get with your best hands.

This comes from a player who knows he should raise far more often.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]

I forgot to reply to this. One of the primary reasons to play marginal hands is to enhance the action you get with your better hands. In fact, it's often in your interest to play some -EV hands if this loosens up your image enough to earn you more +EV on your bigger hands. A similar (and probably significantly stronger) agrument can be made for raising with some -EV hands since this can dramatically increase the action you get with your best hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be true against opponents are paying attention and understand what they are doing.

I think that you and Piiop are overthinking this. We are not talking about a discussion of playing against good PLO players, if you find players that are doing more than looking at their own cards (and playing them incorrectly) find another table.

And again, same disclaimers - more than one way to beat PLO25 and this is a small point I believe, i.e. I can't imagine there being a great overall difference in EV here (either way).

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
This may be true against opponents are paying attention and understand what they are doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even at PLO 25, a significant fraction (albeit a probable minority) of your opponets will understand. Also, there will always be players who are half-way along. You need to cater to their partial understanding too.

The again, maybe it's just that Stars has disproportionately more decent PLO25 players than FT.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I think there are some points you make that are not optimal. It also seems like this type of play will not allow you to expand and grow as a player or win for anywhere near as much at especially as you move up in limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm working on a detailed response to your points since I played both ways and opinions on both. However, it is not clear to me if you are speaking from experience at beating loose passive PLO25-ish game with poor opponents or you are speaking theoretically?

[jad14]

[ QUOTE ]
To the poster who was thinking of moving up from .10/.25 to .25/.5. Dont even worry about it. Take some shots and see how you do. I played plo25 at ub for awhile and decided to play at ftp. I started playing .25/.5 at ftp and havent looked back. As long as you have any semblance of plo knowledge you can beat plo50 for a good amount. I've doubled my roll in about 2500 hands and am crushing that game from about 20bb/100 (which i really do believe is sustainable at that level).

Also, i suggest taking shots at the new mixed games on ftp. The HA game is pretty much fantastic as you can tilt a guy in HE and take the rest of his money in PLO where your advantage comes in.

I'm was like you in terms of br management and then i read the rempel's well thread and decided to try out his ideas (since he plays a similar game to what I like to play). I highly recommend checking that out if your interested in moving up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried the PLO50. Only adjustment made was tighter hand selection since preflop raising was more frequent. Post flop aggression was higher as well. Could have been just this table though.

[Troll_Inc]

"There's no doubt that this strategy will beat $25 games and like you said, there are other styles and other strategies that will result in winning poker. However, I think there are some points you make that are not optimal. It also seems like this type of play will not allow you to expand and grow as a player or win for anywhere near as much at especially as you move up in limits."

I disagree strongly that learning and implementing a winning strategy for beating a loose passive PLO25 game will prevent further growth of a player. Yes, the player should be aware that all games are not the same, and this basic strategy has its limits. But as long as you are aware that differences exist between games, then I don't see why you can't continue to learn what is needed to beat other types of PLO games.

"Here are a few points that stood out the most:
Starting cards - This seems way too tight, especially for 6max."

Playing tight will lead to fewer difficult decisions on the flop. Also, it should reduce the high variance associated with PLO cash game results. This is beneficial to the beginning player. Again, I want to point out that I feel that my instructions are aimed not for an experienced PLO player to beat PLO25, but rather a beginning-intermediate player.

"Position 'LP you can loosen up a tiny, tiny bit, but don't over do it.' - Again too tight, you can loosen up a lot in LP. This game is all about position - use it."

I think the best way to use position in these games is to build bigger pots when you have good cards in good position.

"3. 'bluff very little' - Well yes and no. Obviously don't bluff calling stations, but there are a lot of situations that you can pick
up the pot with a pure bluff. It's a pretty situational thing to explain, but you just have to pay attention. Don't check behind when you missed your draw only to lose to 2nd pair. If there's a 3way hand that goes check, check, check on the flop, then check on the turn pot it. Agression is good."

I agree 100% with this.

"Raising - You only mention the CO and button as spots to raise. Obviously, your pfr will be highest from those positions, but you can still be raising from other positions."

I think it depends on the table dynamics. With my strategy, I don't want anyone behind me in a raised pot, unless they will bluff at anything checked to them on the flop and will play big big pots postflop.