Thought it might be cool to discuss this here, esp. as I rarely play FL and so am probably a complete fish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_vCT0EFXVc

Hero in SB: $1,524.45 - $15
Villain 1 in BB: $477.86 - $30
Villain 2 UTG: $1,539.57
Villain 2 HI: $2,834.65
Villain 4 CO: xx
Villain 4 BTN: xx

Hero is in SB with AAT2 (pot $45)

Villain 2: Raise $30 (pot $105)
Villain 3: Call (pot $165)
Hero: Raise $30 (pot $240)
Villain 1: Call (pot $300)
Villain 2: Raise $30 (pot $360) -- Capped
Villain 3: Call (pot $420)
Hero: Call (pot $450)
Villain 1: Call (pot $480)

Flop: 9 5 4

Hero: Check
Villain 1: Bet $30 (pot $510)
Villain 2: Call (pot $540)
Villain 3: Call (pot $570)
Hero: Call (pot $600)

Turn: 9 5 4 2

Hero: Check
Villain 1: Check
Villain 2: Check
Villain 3: Bet $60 (pot $660)
Hero: ???


Other discussions:

1. Do we play pre. differently, esp. due to being in SB?
2. Do we normally play flop differently?

In PLO8, I get it in pre. or try to on the flop ... on the turn it's a simple x/f with a big SPR.

Not sure about FLO8 though, we are still drawing dead vs. nut low/wheel or flop low wrap which made 3rd nut low and str8. But we have outs vs. 2 pair (and no visibility) and are ahead of most flush draws. Obv. the big thing is that being limit if we call twice we only need ~1/3 (120 to win 330), although I'm not sure if we want to call river with just AA even if villains 1+2 fold on turn.

The hand has too much value to just flat pre.
On the flop, once it's 4 way AA isn't too likely to hold up for high, so check call seems best with no back up for low.
On the turn, given that UTG raised and got an MP caller, it's still 4 way, capped and BB called the 3 bet A3 is pretty likely and either way we have little equity for high or low so check fold seems best.

Preflop is a clear 3-bet for me. You already have 2 opponents in for sure, so you should extract as much value from them as possible. And you definitely don't just want to let the BB in cheaply.

I'm going to bet most flops. But on this flop, check/call makes sense.
You got pretty unlucky to not even flop one card of either of your suits, and you have no back-up to your nut low draw, which might be quartering anyway.

On the turn, I probably call if I'm closing the action, but I guess folding is right with such bad relative position.

Is this a typo? Isn't this Villain 3? (I'll presume it is).
Hero has a nice starting hand... a premium starting hand.

Very difficult to read this early position raise without knowing more about Villain 2 (UTG) or this table in general. This raise doesn't necessarily mean another premium hand... but it could.

Also very hard to read this call of a double small bet. Villain 3 (HI) could have a 3rd premium hand, or not. I wonder if all these preflop raises (eventually resulting in a cap) are normal for this table.

Why? I'm guessing you made it three bets purely on the basis of having a premium hand. If so, although that's not the way I play, assuming you balance this telegraphing move, it's hard for me to argue with your reasoning.

However, with two opponents already in for 2 small bets and one opponent yet to act, I'd guess Hero's chances for making aces full are severely reduced. However, even if Hero's chances of making aces full are reduced, and even if an opponent has the same nut low draw (A2**) as Hero, Hero still has those two nut flush draws.

Roughly one time in four (P=0.2671) Hero will either make the nut flush on the flop or pick up a good flush draw (two clubs or two diamonds) on the flop.

• the math: (2*11*10*9/6+2*11*10*39/2)/C(48,3)=
  4620/17296=0.2671

So Villain 1 (BB) calls a double bet from early position. I wonder what's up with Villain 1. Is he an imbecile? Does he have a decent starting hand? Is all this action standard for this table? Does Villain 1 always defend his big blind?

Hard for me to read this 3-bet. Off hand it looks to me like there's a strong possibility Villain 2 (CO) simply likes to gamble... but he may have a premium starting hand.

OK... he has position and he's in this far...

OK.

OK.

Not a good flop for Hero's hand. Hero didn't catch an ace, Hero missed both of his flush draws, the flop has another flush draw (hearts), and although Hero has the nut low draw, it's without counterfeit protection.

OK.

BB bets. Could be a heart draw. Could be a set or two pairs. Could be a low draw. Could be some combination of these. Not likely a pure bluff, but that's possible too.

UTG calls. OK. Doesn't mean much one way or another. Could be a heart draw. Could be a set or two pairs. Could be a low draw.

HJ calls. OK. Could be a heart draw. Could be a set or two pairs. Could be a low draw.

OK. Not impossible for the board to pair and for Hero to win high with two pair. (I think that's Hero's best chance to win high). But we're almost purely drawing for the low half of the pot and hoping we don't get counterfeited.

There's too much in the pot to fold.

Rats. So much for not getting counterfeited.

OK.

Not unexpected. Villain 1 (BB) would expect this too, and might be planning a check/raise, which would be nasty for Hero.

This is ugly. Not unexpected, but ugly.

I think Hero has to call and hope BB doesn't check/raise.

Hero can still make low (live ace). Hero can still win or tie high (with a trey, or if the board pairs and nobody makes trips or a full house.

There's too much in the pot to fold. And that's what tends to happen when there's all that preflop raising in a fixed-limit game.

We? Ha ha ha. (I'm chuckling).

I would not have raised, pre-flop with your hand, even though you do have a premium starting hand. I generally like to do my fixed-limit raising on the third (and/or maybe the fourth) betting round, after I see if my starting hand checks out.

Just a matter of (my) fixed-limit playing style. To each his/her own.

Buzz

Just to clarify, this is a puzzle/question/whatever posted by Adrienne Rowsome (aka. talonchick on here and pokerstars).

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/18...ckage-1339488/

All of the first post was me trying to convert her video into text (I also linked to the video).



So, Buzz you never 3bet from the SB here? I assume not from the BB either? It sounds like never even with position? You also don't raise the flop here even if the two flop hearts are diamonds?

FWIW, I calculated the equities against some reasonable ranges (two relatively tight, one loose), and got the following for your hand in a four-way pot:

Pre-flop: 39%
Flop: 32%
Turn: 7%

39% equity in a four-way pot is a massive edge in O8! I don't think the deception value of cold-calling pre-flop can make up for giving away a 14% equity advantage. And your equity plummets so low on the turn that I do think folding is probably right. Make it a heads-up pot and you definitely have the odds to call down.

I read the thread you linked... twice. I don't see what that thread has to do with this thread.

Did you send us on a wild goose chase?

I don't like to say "never." I don't have a rigid rule prohibiting 3bets. Whether I choose to 3bet or not is decided on a case by case basis. But in the case of the hand/situation you posted I would not 3bet.

There might be some situations where I'd 3bet from the SB. But in general I don't like to get stuck in the pot. And when the pot gets jammed pre-flop in a fixed-limit game, the pot size can easily become so large compared to the cost of continuing that I will tend to feel stuck in the pot.

If I did 3bet pre-flop in a fixed-limit game, it would generally be because I thought my 3bet would knock out somebody I wanted to knock out. (Here the 3bet might possibly knock out BB (your Villain 1) - but I see the danger of 3betting as possibly having Villain 2 cap (as happened). And then we're just gambling, more or less stuck in the pot. Right or wrong, that's how I see it.

Meh. I don't know... It's fun to gamble. But I'm very competitive. In other words, I try to win. And I don't honestly think jamming pre-flop and getting more or less stuck in a bloated pot is my best chance of winning.

However, I'll give you this, since we'll probably never face each other across the table: If you're not as good a poker player as your opponent, then you might even the odds a bit by jamming before the flop in a fixed-limit game of Omaha-8.

Are we still talking about 3betting? For me it's on a case by case basis. I don't feel rigid about it.

Reason #1 for me to 3bet: I might want to knock out a particular opponent so as to get one-on-one with a weak opponent.

Reason #2 for me to 3bet: I might want to distort my table image so as to come across as reckless.

Reason #3 for me to 3bet: I might want to come across as someone who played his own cards instead of his opponent and, accordingly, 3bet premium hands.

Reason #4 for me to 3bet: There are Omaha-8 players who are smarter than I am and who are better poker players than I am. Against superior opponents, I might 3bet here.

But in general, no, I probably don't 3bet much before the flop from any position.

Playing after the flop is, for me, an entirely different matter.

If the flop were 9,5,4, then in my opinion, Hero would have a very nice flop fit. In addition to the nut low draw, Hero would have the nut flush draw... a very powerful post-flop hand.

If the flop were 9,5,4 instead of leading with a check, I'd generally lead with a bet. And that might change everything. (I wouldn't generally check because
1. I don't generally try for check/raises because most of my play is face to face. People don't like being check/raised. They don't think getting check/raised is fun. If someone thinks you're a better player, check/raising him/her is rubbing his/her nose in it. I want my opponents to have a good time when I beat them, even though they have lost. I want my opponents to like me, to invite me back into their homes when it's a private game, to enjoy playing with me, and to want to sit down at a table in a casino where I'm already seated.
2. I don't think a nut flush draw plus a nut low draw without counterfeit protection is strong enough to slow play).
3. I think it's more difficult for opponents to read my hand if I bet when I make the flush on the turn or river.
For lack of a better term, I would call a bet with Hero's hand after a flop of
9,5,4 a "semi-bluff."

Buzz

Cap pre and jam the flop. Turn is a disaster but if we can get through for one bet see a river.

It's certainly not fun to get "stuck" in a big pot. But by 3-betting, you are getting your opponents "stuck" in a big pot just as much as you are getting yourself stuck.

And with a hand like this, which has multiple ways to make the nuts, you are going to get "stuck" in marginal situations a lot less often your opponents who are probably playing cards much more likely to make the 3rd or 4th nuts both ways. You're not going to feel very stuck when you're betting nut low+nut flush on the river into a 16 big bet pot and you opponent is debating whether to call down with a naked A4!

This is exactly the sort of hand that you want to create a big pot with, because it is the sort of hand that will more often be easier to play than your opponents' hands.

I don't understand how Villain 4-betting is a danger. You have a top 1% hand easily. You have a pretty big edge even on your opponent's 4-betting range. And even better, you have an enormous edge on the other two opponents who you have trapped in the pot for an extra 2 big bets!

It's true that any money you ever put into the pot preflop is "gambling". But you are gambling with a big edge (at least big relative to almost any preflop situation you will find in O8. And if you are averse to gambling with a big edge, I'm not sure why you like poker in the first place.

In my mind, the two biggest reasons to raise preflop in O8 are:
1.) Induce the blinds to fold their investment
2.) Get additional money into the pot with an equity edge

I think there are times when you don't want to put money in the pot with an equity edge, because you can better leverage an edge on later streets, either through your position or because you've masked the value of your hand. But I think these are much lesser consideration in a limit game, where there just aren't that many opportunities to get money into the pot; the later streets are not exponentially more important to the pot size like in a big-bet game.

3-betting here (a) might induce the BB to fold a decent hand that should correctly call on additional bet; (b) gets money in the pot with about as big an equity advantage as you can get in this game; and (c) will get your opponents stuck into a big pot where they will often be forced to call down with a marginal losing hand. I can't really think of a better spot for this.

What you seem to be implying is if I don’t want to be stuck in the pot myself, I must want my opponents to be stuck in the pot.

And while that sometimes is true, it’s not always true. (Because sometimes you can get an opponent to fold a better hand if he doesn’t feel stuck in the pot).

I like to have that option. I realize my opponents also have that option, but if I have more poker playing skill than my opponents, I should recognize each situation better than my opponents on later betting rounds.

Good point.

Depends.

Agreed.

There’s some merit in that point of view. However, by doing that you sacrifice playability.

Any time a pot is so bloated that I'm stuck is an easy hand for me to play. But it’s also easier for my opponents to play.

4-betting the first betting round in a full fixed-limit game makes the pot big enough that anyone can more easily get stuck.

Agreed.

I don't know what his 4-betting range is. (As an extreme example, suppose it's premium hands such as the one Hero holds). But OK, it’s probably true that Hero has the best starting hand here.

...unless the 4-bettor has the same (A2)(AX) type hand as Hero... But OK, that's probably true.

Agreed. Good point.

I'm not averse to gambling with a big edge.

I think I can do better if the pot is initially smaller. I have a big ego and (rightly or wrongly) think I can out-play most opponents on later betting rounds.

Why I like poker in the first place has nothing to do with how I would play this hand... but for what it’s worth, I think the reason I like poker is simply because I like competition.

I used to like golf although I was a terrible golf player. (I can’t play golf anymore because of problems with my shoulder after playing a round). I didn’t make any money playing golf. Indeed, I usually lost. Why did I like golf even though I was not good enough to make money playing? I think simply because I like to compete, win or lose. And I think I like playing Omaha-8 poker for basically the same reason. At least I’m good at Omaha-8 poker.

I think I see where you’re coming from and that makes sense to me.

Agreed. But that’s not the main reason why I don’t want to build the pot size on the first betting round.

I think an important aspect of Omaha-8 is converting half pot winners into scoopers. There aren’t a lot of opportunities to do that (convert half pot winners into scoopers). You need the right opponents and you need the skill to recognize the opportunity when it presents itself. But the opportunity doesn’t tend to present itself when the pot is bloated due to first round raises.

That sounds correct to me, but I think you’ve missed the point. I believe we’re thinking along different lines.

I think I understand what you’re saying and I appreciate your explanation. Thank you.

For what it's worth, I use different tactics when playing a high/low split game than when playing a one winner game. In a split pot game, my focus is more on converting half pot winners into scoopers by judiciously timed bets and raises than on getting more money into the pot on the first betting round when I probably have the best starting hand. Doing that is easier against some opponents, than others... but one way to enhance that possibility is simply to avoid bloating the pot on the first betting round, even whey you're dealt a premium hand.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

Why in god's name are you slowing down on your gin flop?

FWIW: she x/f turn, and gave reasoning for each action in her followup video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo_UMtidH9Q

Happy to see the discussion here! Love the statistical analysis and all different views on the hand.

Hi , to my opinion , i dont see the value of raising pre for two reasons : 1 : from the SB You better disguise your premium hand so opponents Will think You just complete with any random hand then You CAN Check raise on Later streets if You hit of course 2 : that wont fold the opposition since it is flop limit.

Now it depends on your initial intention ( getting people out of the pot or building a bigger pot ,,,?) it wont succeed in fl for the first reason and reraising from the sb makes it obvious for the opposition of what kind of hand You are holding if it was for the second reason.

Even if You would hit the flop hard with a nut low the only callers would call for the nut high and You would end up sharing the pot ( since they would Know You hold at least a2. If You hit a SET chances are great the opposition Will have a better low with a chance of getting a wheel n You would be in danger Again unless You hit a fh on river and You would share only half the pot.

SO The only favorable scénario would be that You hit hard on low and high and 3 quarter someone who cant fold a low but that wont happen often enough

Reraising with this hand from the sb would only have value short stacked in a tourney of plo 8 or nlo8 in late stages ( comiting more then half your stack pre ) ps : Never played fl but seems logical

I wonder if any of the posters here play FLO8 on PokerStars regularly these days. Would be fun to see some graphs with winrates, or some FLO8 challenges. Sorry for the off topic