PokerStars - $0.25 PL Hi FAST (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 138.56 BB (VPIP: 23.53, PFR: 5.88, 3Bet Preflop: 12.50, Hands: 18)
SB: 178 BB (VPIP: 14.29, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 21)
BB: 88.08 BB (VPIP: 48.90, PFR: 19.49, 3Bet Preflop: 4.99, Hands: 9,735)
UTG: 183.24 BB (VPIP: 25.00, PFR: 13.79, 3Bet Preflop: 4.76, Hands: 118)
Hero (MP): 113 BB
CO: 100 BB (VPIP: 25.00, PFR: 25.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 4)

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has A 9 Q J

fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, CO calls 3 BB, BTN calls 3 BB, fold, fold

Flop: (10.4 BB, 3 players) 9 5 Q
Hero checks, CO checks, BTN bets 8 BB, Hero calls 8 BB, fold

Turn: (26.4 BB, 2 players) 3
Hero bets 16 BB, BTN calls 16 BB

River: (58.4 BB, 2 players) K
Hero bets 38 BB, fold

Hero wins 55.92 BB


I did check on the flop because my hand can't stand a raise right? Or is it a bet/fold? Or bet/call?

On the turn I was thinking about check raising, but I was afraid that he would check behind some hands and I wouldn't be able to represent nut flush. But can he assume that I would c/c the flop with nut flush?

Is there any reason to give up the bluff on the river? Is my line consistent ? Does it seem like I have nut flush? Can he fold TJ or weak flushs here?

Would you play it like this if you did have the nut flush?

Bet turn bigger if you're gonna do this btw.

I think with nut flush i'd play the same way... but the problem is the flop, is it a bet/fold?

quite like how youve played it, as normally I would lead, lead lead - but this line youve taken is almost more believable to be the nut flush

Now that I re-look at the action I don't think you rep the nut flush well at all since I think you'd almost always cb that.

I think you should've cb btw.

I would assume that if you raised pre in MP with the NFD in your hand and this flop came up, then you would also have a SD to go with the NFD, which would lead you to cbet. It's hard to see how you would just have a bare NFD.

OTT, it looks a lot like you c/c flop with a weak FD and are probing turn to see if you're good or not.

If you're going to bluff turn, then I'd pot it in order to put villain to the test. That makes it harder for him to bluff raise or call you.

Its not hard to see how he could have just a bare NFD. The table is not exactly full of loose aggressive people. Depending on stats of hero, there could be lots of hands to raise in MP that would fold out CO and Btn.

That is what we want. Unless villain has the K high flush or is reading us very well, he will be hesitant to continue on and if he does, fold most rivers unimproved or with worse flushes.

18 hands is no where near significant, but villain seems to play straight forward, which probably means giving up on a lot of rivers.

Check flop, pot turn looks fishy. Why would you pot the turn with the nuts after checking the flop? Unless you have a history with villain that he would assume you were bluffing and try to play back at you, that doesn't seem like a profitable decision. Someone with the nut flush should not want their opponent to fold out worse hands, which in turn makes that line seem fishy.

Well unless you are leading worse flushes than Add you certainly want to pot it.

With no history on villain and not having the nut flush, I don't mind the pot bet. However this still seems like an odd play to me and not one that we would likely take if we had the goods. Assuming we had the nut flush, what do you expect villain to be calling or raising with when you open for pot on the turn, assuming no prior history? Why would he believe we are taking this line with the current nuts?

OP, you are not repping the nf, you are repping a random flush in a spot where you, as played with the flop c/c, have perfectly fine sdv, block both top set and sec set as villains value range and are therefore basically trying to get him to fold the strongest part of his range, non nut flushes. and you attempted that by using a line no one will give you credit for the nut flush. you see the flaw in your logic?

So wait.

Leading for pot with the nuts is supposedly bad because villain can't be expected to continue with much against a pot-sized bet . . .

. . . but leading for pot with the nut blocker is supposedly bad because villain won't believe us (and will continue with enough to make the bluff less effective).



You could certainly check or lead ~1/6th pot -- betting large could be a mistake with this hand -- but the point is that if you're betting any significant % of the pot, it should be 100%.

My statements were based on the fact that we have no prior history with this opponent. There is no reason for him to call a pot bet, but no reason for him to fold one because we haven't been in enough situations with him to give him a reason to fold. We're trying to tell a story that hasn't had enough chapters written yet to be believable if we just come firing out for pot, regardless of what we have.

The flip side is that he may do the exact opposite and call a pot bet when when we have the nuts or fold to a pot bet when we have air. I just don't see the value in potentially blowing my opponent off a hand when I have the nuts, or wasting a pot bet with air, when I have no information about their tendencies to make that an informative and correct decision.

If we are going to pot bet here, regardless of our hand, I'm just looking for an explanation of why you feel its the right play. That was why I questioned it. Provide a little more insight into the reasoning for the decision to pot in this spot against a virtual unknown. Perhaps why you would want to do it with both the nut flush blocker and with the nuts, instead of some sort of value bet that could also be believable.

Pot turn, shove river - this is the default line for playing the nut flush right? And am I the only one who want to b/3b flop

In PLO25 this is how I'd expect a passive player to play the NF. Otherwise I've been making a bunch of bad folds

I'd much prefer betting the flop, but readless in micro Zoom with the NF blocker getting raised on the flop looks super strong, I'd prefer b/f.

I think the fact that we have no prior history should make us want to pot turn even more. We want to maximize our FE and potting it should help villain give us more credit with no history.

A PSB would be consistent with our hand had we actually had the NF (although I'm inclined to think we woulda cbet that OTF). The PSB is mainly for value, as opposed to "blowing our opponent off a hand".

Note that the NF is only the nuts OTT, but can be rivered by 2P, sets, JT, SD plus GSSFD, etc. Potting turn with the NF is the PLO equivalent of a value bet.

Betting 2/3 pot tends to look weak and will get called, which is not what we want. And when we get called, we're not sure if villain has a big hand or if we're being floated.

So what does this imply about his frequencies?

He has to either call or fold. You're saying there's no "reason" for him to either call or fold, so what will he actually do?

Betting flop is fine. If we're betting flop its to bet/call.

As played bet turn bigger. As played bet river bigger.