Limit o8 - open limping from late position,

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
He should not have said mathematically,

[/ QUOTE ]Agreed.[ QUOTE ]
but logically I it clearly optimal to raise-or-fold when opening from a late postion in any flop game.

[/ QUOTE ]Micturition Man - "Clearly" optimal? It's not clear to me that "raise-or-fold when opening from a late postion in any flop game" is optimal. Indeed, I do not think it is optimal in limit Omaha-8.

[ QUOTE ]
the combination of fold equity, buying the button, increased likelihood of winning the pot postflop due to position, and increased postflop bluff equity due to representing a stronger hand preflop than you actually have make raise-or-fold clearly correct.

[/ QUOTE ]I assume "than" is a typo for "then." <ul type="square">• 1. fold equity
• 2. buying the button,
• 3. increased likelihood of winning the pot postflop due to position, and
• 4. increased postflop bluff equity due to representing a stronger hand preflop than you actually have[/list]I don't understand what you mean by <ul type="square">#1. fold equity[/list](Maybe I'm missing something).

#2, #3, and #4 above seem good reasons to raise in a very tight, tough game. However, I don't know why you'd want to play in a very tight, tough game when loose games abound. (Maybe that's somehow the only game you can find).

Position is subtly important, IMO. It would be a slight advantage to knock out the players behind you so as to gain position (buy the button).

And you do have increased post-flop bluff equity if your pre-flop raise is made with a hand with which you normally would not make a pre-flop raise from late position. However, you lose this "increased post-flop bluff equity" if you always raise from late position. Indeed, when you bet aggressively on a later betting round without having made a pre-flop raise, your bet or raise may seem more credible to your opponent(s). I think it depends on how you normally play.

"Always" is a key word here. I believe the concept of deception is important, if not overdone, in Omaha-8 play. There doesn't seem much deception in "always."

I do sometimes play Texas hold 'em, and when playing that flop game, I probably usually raise from late position. But that game is very different from limit Omaha-8.

In a full game of limit-Omaha-8, it's important to have a good fit with the flop, because there is an increased probability, compared to Texas hold 'em, of an opponent having a good fit with the flop - especially if you do not.

Thus it's more difficult to bluff a fit with the flop in limit-Omaha-8. Accordingly, a continuation bet does not work as well in limit-Omaha-8, and is much more likely to end up in disaster than in Texas hold 'em.

I'm not suggesting that you never bluff on the second betting round, but frequent bluffing seems unwise, meaning that continuation bets seem unwise. The problem is you dribble chips away at an alarming rate because you get called (or raised) much more by somebody who actually can well use two or three of the flop cards.

Thus the concept of a pre-flop raise coupled with a continuation bet simply does not work well in limit Omaha-8.

It costs you more to make a pre-flop raise than to limp. And although you do increase the cost to your opponents on the first betting round, you do not necessarily win more from them on the hand, even when you do end up with a good flop fit and go on to make a winning hand. There are also the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th betting rounds to consider. And no hand is an island. There also are future hands to consider.

If you always raise before the flop, you tend to make play at the table tighter, at least while you're still in a hand. Some of your opponents will think twice about playing trash and chasing with bad flop fits when they know you may well make it more expensive for them to do so. They'll back off with trash they might otherwise play when they realize if you are yet to act behind them, you will probably punish them for loose play.

That's just the way it is.

Buzz