Omaha Chasers....

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]


I understand the fold 10000000% - and have no problem with it, it's just that you said [ QUOTE ]
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

[/ QUOTE ]but there was already the possibility of a made straight after the flop - of course the 10 added more options - but if the 10 didn't come are you calling his bet anyway?

Besides, I don't have a problem with the way you played the hand (other than the fact that you might have been betting into a made straight after the flop) - it was more the repsonses to my posts about not pushing just because there is a flush draw on the board - and that in hold'em he would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but there are many more card pairs he holds that were drawing on the flop but hit on the river. hence charge draws. i'm calling the river if the board pairs or if there's a 2,3, K or some other bricks.

[pete fabrizio]

[ 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]

[ 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]

[ 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.

[evazan]

A way to I look at it is if you have the nut straight, say j 10 on a 9 8 7 two flush board and there is a lot of action you can almost consider yourself to be the one drawing. If you can assume the worst case scenario that there are better straight draws out there, a set, and a flush draw theres not many cards you want to see. 9 cards pair the board, 8 more cards complete the flush, and 4 cards make better straights(i didn't count double. This leaves you with 29 outs but if someone also has the same straight as you defenitly dont want to be in the pot.

[goose023]

[ QUOTE ]
A way to I look at it is if you have the nut straight, say j 10 on a 9 8 7 two flush board and there is a lot of action you can almost consider yourself to be the one drawing. If you can assume the worst case scenario that there are better straight draws out there, a set, and a flush draw theres not many cards you want to see. 9 cards pair the board, 8 more cards complete the flush, and 4 cards make better straights(i didn't count double. This leaves you with 29 outs but if someone also has the same straight as you defenitly dont want to be in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

why is it that people feel the need to explain the same thing over and over again - instead of reading what my intial statement was.

For the last time....
<font color="red">I UNDERSTAND ABOUT DOUBLE DIGIT DRAWS/REDRAWS/ETC ETC - but the things I have been seeing have nothing to do with this. I am talking about people drawing to a flush AND ONLY a flush (and a lot of the times not even the nut flush) - this is what they have shown at showdown - NO 21 out draws nothing more than a flush</font>

Now as I said numerous times - maybe it has something to do with the limits I play at, and the players misguided ideas that it is okay to chase in omaha - even though their outs are the same as they would be in NLHE, and the math makes it wrong to do so (unless you like to gamble).

One example I have of this is play the comment made by someone at a table I was playing at - after he rivered a gutshot (he had NOTHING ELSE) and the dude he was playing against went off on him. He said "hey man don'y u know that omaha is a drawing game".

It is this I have run into often at the low limits I play at.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
why is it that people feel the need to explain the same thing over and over again - instead of reading what my intial statement was.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it has to do with how you phrased the question. E.g., quoting me as though I supported some ridiculous proposition that bore no resemblance to what I actually said. As for your "statement", yes, everyone gets it -- people will call too much money with mediocre draws and little to no implied odds -- that's one reason this game so profitable.

[CrushinFelt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is it that people feel the need to explain the same thing over and over again - instead of reading what my intial statement was.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it has to do with how you phrased the question. E.g., quoting me as though I supported some ridiculous proposition that bore no resemblance to what I actually said. As for your "statement", yes, everyone gets it -- people will call too much money with mediocre draws and little to no implied odds -- that's one reason this game so profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if you want an answer as to why then don't ask people that don't do it. Take it as "thrill-seeking" on their part and be done with it.

[goose023]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is it that people feel the need to explain the same thing over and over again - instead of reading what my intial statement was.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it has to do with how you phrased the question. E.g., quoting me as though I supported some ridiculous proposition that bore no resemblance to what I actually said. As for your "statement", yes, everyone gets it -- people will call too much money with mediocre draws and little to no implied odds -- that's one reason this game so profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if you want an answer as to why then don't ask people that don't do it. Take it as "thrill-seeking" on their part and be done with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pete - I think it was more the fact that I took what u wrote to literally. I thought u where talking about him only being worried about the flush. Profitable - hell yes that's why I like it.

Crushin - U are absolutely correct, asking people who never do dumb things is definately a problem. But considering this forum doesn't have a "PLO Low Limit" forum - where dumb things are done regularily - I don't think I have any other place ask.

[CrushinFelt]

Well what does answering this question solve? It is what it is. There are more -EV chasers in Omaha. Smile and take their moniesssss. And if they suck out take it in stride and gladly let them chase again.