NFD faces a c/r

[alavet]

[blah_blah]

For an unknown PLO25 villain, his c/r range on flop is waaaaayyyy wider than sets and includes a lot of wraps, wraps with flush draws, two pairs, OESDs + FDs, OESDs with a pair, whatever. Basically it's very likely that OP's hand has about 50% equity against his weighted range, and you are never folding turn so just stick it in. If you call, most villains don't make big mistakes with $3 left in $15 pots, and the biggest mistake of all that he can make is probably to fold the flop to a reraise.

Buzz's analysis is abysmal; the assumptions are poor, the math is almost nonexistent despite his professed love of odds (where's the pokerstove and liberal use of the the word 'equity' along with the associated EV calculations, buzz?), and he clearly has very little experience with online shorthanded PLO. Basically all of his posts in this thread are completely worthless.

[Craggoo]

[ QUOTE ]
For an unknown PLO25 villain, his c/r range on flop is waaaaayyyy wider than sets and includes a lot of wraps, wraps with flush draws, two pairs, OESDs + FDs, OESDs with a pair, whatever. Basically it's very likely that OP's hand has about 50% equity against his weighted range, and you are never folding turn so just stick it in. If you call, most villains don't make big mistakes with $3 left in $15 pots, and the biggest mistake of all that he can make is probably to fold the flop to a reraise.

Buzz's analysis is abysmal; the assumptions are poor, the math is almost nonexistent despite his professed love of odds (where's the pokerstove and liberal use of the the word 'equity' along with the associated EV calculations, buzz?), and he clearly has very little experience with online shorthanded PLO. Basically all of his posts in this thread are completely worthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with what you said about buzz. His assumption that whenever someone check-raises they have the nuts is completely incorrect. This is 6max nor FR. Anybody who doesnt stick it in with this kind of hand on this kind of board is incredibly weak tight. Now, if you have history with the villain and know that he is check-calling draws and check-raising sets then his assumptions are correct. If buzz actually plays PLO then i would love to play with him. Buzz, do fish swim upstream or downstream?

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you still defending your losing position Buzz?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a losing position at all.
It's pretty logical to call the flop. The only hand that really matters is if the villain is bluffing. He can't carry on bluffing if you raise him all-in. Better to call.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you still defending your losing position Buzz?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a losing position at all.
It's pretty logical to call the flop. The only hand that really matters is if the villain is bluffing. He can't carry on bluffing if you raise him all-in. Better to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

if he folds a bluff on the flop, he is probably making a mistake.

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you still defending your losing position Buzz?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a losing position at all.
It's pretty logical to call the flop. The only hand that really matters is if the villain is bluffing. He can't carry on bluffing if you raise him all-in. Better to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

if he folds a bluff on the flop, he is probably making a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]
Possibly yes, but people DO make pretty dumb bluffs at every level.
http://www.pokerhand.org/?1400308

[RoundTower]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you still defending your losing position Buzz?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a losing position at all.
It's pretty logical to call the flop. The only hand that really matters is if the villain is bluffing. He can't carry on bluffing if you raise him all-in. Better to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
well if he has precisely 2222, it's probably better to let him bluff again. But even if he has a hand as bad as 3457 no spades no clubs, you want him to fold.

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you still defending your losing position Buzz?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a losing position at all.
It's pretty logical to call the flop. The only hand that really matters is if the villain is bluffing. He can't carry on bluffing if you raise him all-in. Better to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
well if he has precisely 2222, it's probably better to let him bluff again. But even if he has a hand as bad as 3457 no spades no clubs, you want him to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

But we've already established that he wont fold with a hand like that. Betting a pair is a semi bluff in omaha, not a bluff, especially when he puts opponent on aces.

[TomCowley]

Betting gets value out of worse hands (when they call while behind) or gets them to incorrectly fold, ensures that currently better hands pay us off if we hit, and prevents truly horrible hands (that should fold the flop) from hitting on the turn and getting a chance to draw properly at the river.

Calling allows currently better hands to possibly lay down (correctly) to a turn spade, fails to extract value from bad hands that would have called the flop, but won't call the turn, and fails to protect our hand from truly terrible hands that would have correctly folded the flop, but now catch enough of the turn to continue.

This isn't even close.

[Buzz]

Craggoo - I’ve already made too many posts in the thread to which you responded, but I feel an obligation to respond, hopefully for the last time in this thread.

I certainly did lay an egg on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with what you said about buzz.

[/ QUOTE ]Some of it was true. Some of it wasn’t. [ QUOTE ]
His assumption that whenever someone check-raises they have the nuts is completely incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ] You obviously misunderstood what I wrote. Specifically, in my first post in this thread, I wrote:[ QUOTE ]
Does Villain have the set of kings his bet must represent or not?

That is the question.

Since Villain is unknown we have no idea.

[/ QUOTE ]That clearly is not an assumption that BB had a set of kings. (I did consider it as one of various possibilities).

[ QUOTE ]
Anybody who doesnt stick it in with this kind of hand on this kind of board is incredibly weak tight.

[/ QUOTE ]Hmm. I’m not advocating folding, merely allowing BB to make a mistake and giving BB enough rope to hang himself. That might not be the best approach, but is it “incredibly weak tight”? (I think not).
[ QUOTE ]
If buzz actually plays PLO then i would love to play with him.

[/ QUOTE ]Get in line. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
Buzz, do fish swim upstream or downstream?

[/ QUOTE ] Discussion of various points of view is an objective of this forum. And in this thread I tried to present my point of view. You can disagree with my point of view. But you don’t have to ridicule it (or anyone’s point of view).

Most people who have posted in this thread do disagree with my point of view. And that is fine. Hopefully that leads to healthy discussion and we all learn something and improve. But when you start ridiculing someone’s point of view, you tend to stifle healthy discussion and debate – and then nobody learns much.

That’s just my opinion.

Buzz