Learning Omaha is brutal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheRempel]

That is horrible. Assuming 100BB stacks and that the villain has the straight you'd be getting your money in bad on 2 streets instead of good on one. Checking the flop is terribly terribly weak and will ensure you only get action in the future when you are being freerolled.

Betting this flop you'll get action from a ton of hands including bare NFD's, two pair, smaller sets, small wraps and so on.

[TheRempel]

KcJc9c9h 43.12%
86**,As*s**,77**,55**,97** 28.57%
86**,*s*s**,77**,55**,97** 28.32%

[MadScientist]

Rempel: when you check you will not get action only when you are behind because then you hand is disguised.
Your thought process should go like this: when I check what hands will give me action (a wide range, that I will leave up to you), given that range can I call. I believe the answer is yes against all but the biggest nits.
When you lead, you often just get a ton of money in the middle while behind and force out a lot of hands that would make a second best hand if you improve.
Summary: if you check you are ahead often when you get action. When you improve, you will sometimes win a big pot from a worse hand.

Also, why is it that when replying to me you pick the worst option on every street....
I never imagined folding turn when we have more outs after calling flop.
On the flop, just calling down in a small pot, when we are behind limits our damage.
Original poster, please sound in. Which sounds more reasonable to you and why, betting pot on flop looking to get it all in or checking flop and calling looking to boat up?

[MadScientist]

Here for instance is a reasaonble hand, that we are very far behind against and if we were to go heads up against, getting all our money in, we would lose a good bit. Notice that a few of our outs are dead.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=2597415
pokenum -o kc jc 9c 9h - 6h 7s 8d 9d -- 5s 7h 9s
Omaha Hi: 820 enumerated boards containing 9s 5s 7h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Kc Jc 9c 9h 265 32.32 555 67.68 0 0.00 0.323
7s 9d 8d 6h 555 67.68 265 32.32 0 0.00 0.677

[TheRempel]

On that flop there are few hands that are going to make second best hands that are going to give you any action at all. Checking will give a lot of free cards that you don't want to see and can put you in a very bad spot if the shortstack leads the turn, you call, and the guy behind raises.

The entire reason for betting this flop is that the OP is the preflop raiser. You can and will get action from a lot of hands that you are ahead of, some that you are behind but are getting a good price to fill up on getting better than 2:1 on a push, and a few that you have drawing close to dead (55 and 77 without redraws).

Pushing the flop is clearly the best line. There are spots where check-calling, bet-folding and check-folding might be warranted but this definitely isn't one of them.

If you do get the situation you want and the LP player bets, the shortstack calls and you call, you are almost always getting reverse implied odds to call the turn, especially since you're probably not going to have enough money left to bluff two people out on a scary river.

It sounds to me like you're more concerned with getting to show down without playing for your stack then you are with actually playing Omaha properly.

[MadScientist]

The ranges you put into your calc are ridiculous.
The flush draw nothinge else, the lower sets.
Yeah, cause everyone plays 55**, 77** everytime they see a raise coming at them...

If OP had a very aggressive image, such that they would get action from a lot of much worse hands when she lead the flop, then I would be all for getting it all in here.
As played, she will often run herself into the nuts.

[TheRempel]

You're talking about HU in a situation where the villian has the perfect hand to beat you. What part of an average opponents range do you think 6789 is?

[TheRempel]

Meh. You're braindead. Gotta stop wasting my time trying to help nitty goofballs play better.

[MadScientist]

You are right that we won't be up against that hand everytime.
To be honest, it is hard to put the opps on a range given that OP hasn't given her table image (aggro or not?) or any reads.
Readless, you will tend to run her into the nuts.
If I had to put a range on opps hands (assuming she ends up heads up, as is she ends up three way, so get it all in, three way all in), the range I would give would be
nut straight (many ways for that from pairs with side cards to make the straight to wraps), lower sets (but they don't raise that often), nutflush draw + stuff (two pair (verg goot for us), straight draw (not so good)).
I think when she gets raised it will be the straight (>50% of the time), flush draw + straight (ok equity against our hand) (30%), and hands we crush (two pair, lower sets, bluffs) (20%).
This is from my experience being in these spots.
If you disagree, please post your percentages with a range you think is correct.
Sorry about my tone before. No disrespect meant. I honestly thought OP would be mislead about how to play these spots.

[TheRempel]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just trying to learn this game, so in other words I spew chips like no other sometimes

[/ QUOTE ]