Tell me if my logic is flawed, PLO gives me headaches..

Are we less likely to hit a set on the flop; simply because everyone starts with double the cards, so the chances of someone folding out one of our set cards PF is more likely, than nlhe.

Also, with everyone playing nearly anything double suited, like , JQ79

we'll be facing flushes and straights so much more often.

So is it less profitable to set mine? or is my logic ******ed?

The reason you don't see as many small to medium pocket pairs played is the higher risk of running into a bigger set. They are also less profitable due to the nature of get-it-in ranges in PLO - people don't just punt their stacks in with TPTK or naked overpairs in single-raised pots, even naked two pair often wants to play pot control. Thus you're generally flipping or crushed with a hand like bottom set when money goes in.

While there's abundant spew going on at micro-PLO and people see flops with incredibly wide ranges, you're still up against 12-20 cards and in most pots and the reverse implied odds for hands like 7655 are quite high. Under these circumstances, pure setmining shouldn't be attempted with a pair lower than jacks. You can still play premium TT-77 in position, but connectivity and (double)suitedness are a must.

hey, no noob-bashing on my watch!

Yeah it's less profitable, but not at all bc "everyone starts with double the cards, so the chances of someone folding out one of our set cards PF is more likely than nlhe" that makes no difference. Like ggarj said it's cause sets (esp low + mid sets) are good + hold up a lot less often than when playing 2card poker so implied odds drastically reduced and r.i.o. massively increased.

Your logic is flawed, yep. Whilst it may be more likely that a villain holds your set out; the odds of you hitting a set don't change. This is because villains are also equally as likely to have cards that aren't your set out, "increasing" the probability that your card is still in the pack since there are less cards to choose from. Ofc, it doesn't increase because they could have your set card too. Probability remains the same tho.

its simple, when you hit a set in nlhe, your equity when you get it in will be 80+% against standard ranges, in PLO it will be closer to 60%

Actually we're more likely to hit set since we know 2 cards more.

Typed up a reply yesterday. It's not quite finished but whatever.

No. A single-paired hand is in fact slightly more likely to hit a set in PLO than a pocket pair is in NLHE.

The problem is simply that sets are weaker hands in PLO. Equities run closer.



Low sets often do poorly against the strong portions of ranges in PLO.

Compare 33 against the top 10% of a top-30% PPT range in both respective games.




The difference between low sets and higher sets in PLO is pretty big.

QJ97ds is a fairly good hand. "Nearly anything double-suited" would suggest things like T642ds.

But that isn't quite why you'll be facing flushes and straights more often.

Yes.

I'm not sure it's "less profitable". You can make the argument that you generally have less equity when you GII, but the flip side is that in PLO it's more likely that someone has something they want to play, whereas in NLHE while you are obviously a solid fav when you hit, you also have someone at the end of the hook less often.

It would be easy to check the numbers. I guess in PLO set mining with QQ/JJxx is analogous to 22-66 in NLHE.

but but but... when you setmine with QQ you are also likely to have the best hand preflop.
Which makes it a open/raise for value.

Based on the OP's level of knowledge, I think it was correct to interpret the question as calling for a comparison between a given NLHE PP and the PLO version of the same PP -- for example, 55 and a single-component 55xy.

It was a vaguely worded question, I guess, and the answer could change depending on how one interprets it.

Depends what you consider the best hand. QQxx is <60% against the top 90% of hands, but even taking this into consideration is largely irrelevant considering how hard QQxx is to play well post flop.

True - suffice to say set mining 55xx is terrible under any circumstances.

no way, if we are say 200bb deep and get 4bet from a tight player, i will def setmine 5566ds

dont think 5566ds falls into a general 55xx category lol, it implies 55 with little else

thats like saying playing 50% of hands is good because AAJJ is a good hand

^ exactly.