1/2 6 max, wondering if bluffing is ok.

[sahaguje]

Thanks for your comments. It was really a bad spot to bluff. By the way, he had 4c 3c Td Ac and called me with his pair of aces. I did not realize I looked that much like a maniac to him [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

[RoundTower]

well I would expect you to get through that hand most of the time, but I thought he had aces and and would call.

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for your comments. It was really a bad spot to bluff. By the way, he had 4c 3c Td Ac and called me with his pair of aces. I did not realize I looked that much like a maniac to him [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, seems like I overestimated his range (or underestimated your LAG image), but either way it seems the mini-raise indicated that he thought he had a good enough hand to call you down.

I'd be most interested in an analysis of how the villain played this hand. Primarily I'm wondering if this is an example of a good player making a good read, or a Hold 'em donk thinking he has a good hand here (I realize this can be tough to distinguish).

The funny thing is that he was an underdog on the turn against any hand with at least a 9 in it (or even a 2 in it) and I shouldn't have to tell you how bad he was against any Axxx.

I have never played a hand this (way (SB's line that is). It just strikes me as foolish beyond reason. I mean, this would be debatable in Hold 'em, no?

One of my rules of thumb for PLO is that if you could have a debate with reasonable players about the line you took in Hold Em, it's clearly wrong in Omaha.