I wouldn't pot any hand, but if I started to build a strategy that involves potting this flop, the range would not be linear, but polarized i.e. some hands that I'd be very happy to continue with against a raise and some that I'd confidently fold to a raise.

I'm curious why you would never pot any hand given the equities in the game are amazingly close? i.e., from a strictly pot odds viewpoint it's very often correct to call when behind.

preflop is not postflop

If I understand you correctly, you like to pot because you like to protect your strong hands. When you learn to understand the game better, you will see that it's not about protecting your hands, as there is a rather simple refutation to a very protective approach (folding a lot when you bet and betting a lot when you check).

There are a ton of threads about this subject, with Buzz defending the protective cause and a decent player in the opposite corner.

Let's do math.

If it's level 3 (75-150) and there's a 3x the blind raise with 4 to the flop, the pot now has 1800 chips, and your stack is 9k - 450 = 8550. You pot 1800 bringing your stack to 6750 and he calls bringing the total pot to 5400 (1800x3).

Here's a simulation of the scenario described on the turn:

Board: 8c3sKd7h
Hand Equity Scoops Wins Hi Ties Hi Wins Lo Ties
ac3d3h2s 72.50% 0 38 0 0 40
as2h9c9d 27.50% 0 2 0 0 40

If you get all in with your remaining 6750, he's calling 6750 to win 18,900 (5400+6750+6750). 18,900 / his call of 6750 = 2.8, which means from an equity stand point he needs 28% equity to break even on this call, and he has 27.5%, so from an equity stand point, it's only very slightly a bad call (he's .5% off from making a break even call) and you're at the very top of your range. If you were off at all on the stack sizes you quoted it may well have been a slightly +EV call. Of course, equity isn't the same in a tournament as in a cash game.

Folding the turn could be argued, but I just thought this was fun/interesting to share. More support (to me) that this just isn't an example of a really juicy game or something...

I *think I did the math right.

Cheers-

Thanks for the answer. I can see the sense in the idea offered and appreciate it. Even understanding it, I still disagree with NEVER potting.

If you're playing in an extremely tight game where they're folding a lot when you pot, and betting when you check, then simply pot more in selected spots when you don't have the goods, and check every time you do have the goods = easy money, no? When they catch onto this/become suspicious you can mix up your play and it comes full circle to the point where you can pot with the goods and get called.

I wrote a lot more but removed it... just think about this... when you bet with the better hand, don't you want them to "pay" in equity to call you with the worse hand? Otherwise, where is your EV edge? It doesn't exist and they're playing correctly to call you. If you really look at how close the equities are in this game (just look at the example I posted above) often the only way to make them "pay" and have an EV edge is by potting.

Ugh... Really meant to say folding the FLOP could be argued. (Though I think if we play poker that conservatively we will get eaten alive).

I am referring to postflop.

Note that what I mean is never potting this flop or similar as a default play. Of course you can and should pot as an exploit, as there are a lot of very weak players out there, who simply don't pay attention to anything besides their own holding.

In short, no. You are describing an imaginary cherry-picking strategy. Of course, strategies evolve, but you can never have the best side of different strategies, no matter how you go around in circles.

Sure, you want them to "incorrectly" call your bets, or incorrectly fold to your bets. Making the bet larger forces some hands out, while a smaller bet entices more calls. Bigger is not better, it's way more complicated than that.

If you want to reach the next level, you must try to understand ranges, not just "this hand" vs. "that hand" equities.

if i see this thread i have the idea that if i would play for 1 hour in those 1.5k and 3k o8 toernements.
That i will take back all my words on this forum about mediocer stars players they must be complete geniuses vs the competition on WSOP

Amok, thanks for the words. Your points are well taken. I'm responding directly to this quote:

And my only point is that it can't be correct to never pot in this game.

I'm not sure why you're making assumptions about my level of play in each post, but since I really only care to improve and try to keep ego out of my game, I will try to ignore it.

That is not what I said though. You are taking a single sentence out of context. I'm pretty sure we are now clear on what I meant.

Because you're thinking heavily coincides with the thinking of many advancing (=not yet advanced) players. I am not doing it to boost my ego, if that is what you thought.

the way you talk is clearly the way weak player think/talk\

saying with such certainty that that optimal strategy must contain a pot betting range in this spot show my point.
I think if i would play in these event i would by far be best player. And i can tell you that i am totally not certain that a GTO would contain a pot bet on this flop.
I think even that is maybe unlikely because it so hard to balance pot bets. To bet fold this kind of flops (pot) is most of time only things bad players do. On other hand if bad player pot this flop they like always got it.

Max thread drift confirmed. (actually probably not max until we start talking about talking unicorns and pretty rainbows)

I highly doubt there is a single player on the planet that would be by far the best player in these games.

I'm not certain ... but I think you might be trying to say that you're certain that GTO would not contain PSB OTF.
After all, the world's best player would not be totally uncertain in such a spot.

ofcourse i will not be by far on second best was more in general on averge field.
And i just say best because sound better then saying top 5


hehe i am really not certain as i have say lot of times i am not best because i am good but because everyone sucks really hard at this game.
I know pot range would never be big % in GTO strategy but GTO in o8 is unknow for everyone i can definitly see that GTO cointain a lot of different betsizes and with specific hand it could be pot bet here in GTO

But i am pretty sure hand like A233 would not be in potting range

I definitely just took it out of context and thought you meant you would never pot any hand in this game period in any spot. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I haven't been to this forum often enough and wanted to understand what you were saying.

If you have a second, I'd love it if you could elaborate on some of the bits I'm saying that may be incorrect/weak. I was only trying to use polarized arguments to make the point that there are times in this game when potting is correct. I also don't think I'm very good at communicating the way I think about poker and am not familiar with all the terms you guys are using.

But as mentioned, it's my 4th year (not consecutive) playing this professionally so I'd love to hear more.

Do you guys really think the play with A992 was extremely poor? I would think in a live tournament wherein you aren't going to get dealt that many hands you simply couldn't wait for a golden spot and be folding this.

Sorry to derail the thread. I play this game a ton but rarely come on here and had the urge to check it out. First thread I clicked on I didn't agree/understand and I still don't see how you can afford to fold a992 in a live tourney in this spot .

You are confused, this is roughly what happened:

• deadlysyns said 3k was soft
• deadlysyns Used A992 hand to prove his point
• people defend A992 play (including OMB and amok)
• OMB in his usual way implied that the 3k was soft given deadlysyns play, and his view of opponents
• You then got in argument with amok/OMB about it being possible that having a donk pot range is good here.
• Everyone seems confused, where both sides think the other is defending deadlysyns

And I'm not 100% sure deadlysyns play was bad, he seems to be implying that this early in the tourney staying alive is much better than +EV plays. This tends to be advise online tourney players give, although I think it would be applied badly here without more information.

I'd be expecting someone to bet at this flop and I'd assume the range that calls a pot bet would overlap a huge amount with the range that bets something when checked to, in at least the PFR and those with position.

Also given amok/OMB reads that donk pot here is always a good hand does kind of suggest that A992 flop call is pretty terrible (esp. what's the plan if no low or 9 hits the turn), which is what deadlysyns was suggesting in the first place . So there's that.

THANK YOU. That clears it up for me and I agree with pretty much everything you said. Well don't I feel silly. The only defense I can offer is I'm reading/posting with many tables up... but like I said it seems I have some inability to communicate with other players regardless (maybe because I constantly question myself as well).

Just my final opinion: Personally, I'd lean toward not potting A233 on that flop, but given he was called it shows it might be a fine bet for that table. And I also think the protective / survival perspective is fair. I think there's often more than one way to play a hand that isn't "wrong", but it's interesting to debate what is optimal. I can understand the argument that not optimal = wrong but that's not how I look at it. Often what is optimal depends on factors out of your control, e.g., you have villain on a range where he has hand X or Y, and you can take line A or B, neither of which is wrong against either X or Y, but play A would be more optimal against X and play B would be more optimal against Y. I hope that made sense. Just my current opinion.

I wouldn't assume my a299 was crushed, and given the odds would lean towards seeing a turn. If no low or 9 on the turn I'd fold to a large bet, call a VERY small bet, and at least consider betting if checked to - may depend on whether the board pairs etc.

In both spots it would all be very dependent on reads/stack sizes/feeling of the situation etc. etc. for me. It would be hard for me to say what I think is optimal if I wasn't sitting in the seat.

Cheers-

A299 obv fine

still wonder how bad people can simulate different senarios in there head.

for example this run out it does not change anything on amount you win lose if you bet big or small.
It happen often in o8 that money going in anyway at the end and no need to go allin on flop directly and lose hand you 95%+ vs

OMB this how US players play PLO8

never bluff only 3 bet AAxx and always bet pot

I might find out for sure. I got granted a hall pass from the wife/job. We shall see.

Yo, Buzz I got a question for you?

[edit] Ask it. But since I don't know anything about the difference in skill level between the 1500 & $3000 PLO8 WSOP events, this thread seems an inappropriate place to ask it. Maybe ask your question in the miscellaneous thread or in its own thread. (Or in a private message).

Buzz [/edit]

I love this thread with the strategy discussion. It's the reason why I currently love PLO8 STT and MTT. I think it's fairly soft.

<------- will be shipping the 3K.

Man.. I don't even know what's going on in here. It seems like everyone is being cheeky as if the strategies discussed itt, many of which were posted by me, are terrible, but not offering any reasons why. I thought the point of the forum was discussion. But maybe I'm just misunderstanding everyone... again. I've been away from 2p2 for so long I feel like I have Asperger's.

For the record, I agree with most everything you all are saying.

I question my game constantly and try to improve, but I know I make money. I don't know if you do.