This is a $6/12 two-thirds kill game, so this pot is $10/20. The game is usually pretty good but it’s just started up and is playing the tightest I’ve ever seen. I'm only staying in the game to wait for it to fill up and get better.

Villain (SB) is an extremely LAG, and has been running fabulously over several sessions. She seems to perceive herself as a successful semipro; other players, including solid ones, reinforce this view. In a full-ring situation it’s common for her to show up with 8843, 6543, JJWW, etc. She’ll often bet or raise any draw, nut draw or not; any two pair or better; and sometimes other hands.

When she gets played back at she occasionally becomes a calling station. E.g. if she thin value bets on a scary board on the river, she’s almost always making a crying call.

Preflop (6-handed)
Hero is UTG (to the immediate right of the hijack) in the kill with AT84

Hero posts 1 small bet
SB posts 0.3 small bet
BB posts 0.6 small bet

Hero checks
F F F
Villain completes
BB folds

It’s maybe slightly weird that she didn’t raise against two random/weak hands, but sometimes she plays her hands straightforwardly preflop. I’ll consider this a bit suspicious but I think she’d be raising any A2, A3, 23, JJ+, A4 with a single Broadway, or suited ace here. Her limping range is often 43LL, 42LL kind of hands.

Flop (2.3 sb, net of rake and tip)
9 8 7
Villain bets
Hero calls

She knows I have a slightly weak starting hand range, perceives me as tight, and is probably betting almost 100% here. I expect to be a favorite for both high and low. Honestly, looking back, I think my reason for not raising was just to keep inducing bluffs that I could then raise on the turn.

Turn (2.1 big bets)
4
Villain bets
Hero ???

This narrows her range a little bit . I’ve rarely seen her fire with total air here, but she could easily have a low anywhere from 32 to 53 and no high, or could have some sort of draw for high. There’s a non-negligible probability that she has no low.

plan for the river?
tiny pot and a misdeal, so why bother?

edit: when I don't know what to say, I simulate -

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

2,782,880 trials (Exhaustive)

board: 9874

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
AdTd8c4s	41.04%	554,977	1,324,488	117,734	555,646	67,814
(hh,9,T8,T7,65,T6,JT,87,84,74,A2,A3,A5,35,77-AA,44,J8):15%-75%	58.96%	1,047,241	1,340,658	117,734	1,448,546	67,814

I would have raised preflop.

The only thing that really make sense for her to play this way is some sort of bad low, like 52 or something, 44xx, or some weak two pair with the 4 like (9/8/7)4xx.

If she has a flush draw, she would have bet the flop. She doesn't have a strong low draw (like A2 or A3) as she would have raised preflop or at least bet the flop. Some people play the nuts like this, but it's pretty retarded.

I would call the turn.

She bet the flop and turn.

Oh sorry. I would call. I think the numbers str8 posted aren't quite right, I would remove A2 hands from her range for sure (unless you think she would limp those).

Bummer. (I'm going to assume you mean 4 on the turn, since Hero already has 4 in his hand.

Fold. A black four is a terrible turn card for Hero.
If Hero has 41.04% equity and Villain has 59.96% equity, and if there are already 2 big bets in the pot, it will only cost Hero 2 big bets to see the showdown. When Hero wins, Hero figures to win either 3 bets if Villain check/folds on the river or 4 bets if Villain puts in one more bet on the river.

I don't like folding to a check/raise on the river after Villain checks and Hero bets. Checking behind is better than bet/folding, in my opinion.

If Villain checks the river, let's say Hero also checks.
And then starting from where Hero calls the bet on the turn, Hero only invests one more big bet. In that case if Hero wins, he wins 3 big bets while if Hero loses, he loses 1 (more) big bet. In that case Hero averages winning:
0.4104*3-0.5996*1=+0.6316 big bets is Hero's e.v.

If Villain bets the river, let's say Hero calls.
And then starting from where Hero calls the bet on the turn, Hero invests two more big bets. In that case if Hero wins, he wins 4 big bets while if Hero loses, he loses 2 (more) big bets. In that case Hero averages winning:
0.4104*4-0.5996*2=+0.4424 big bets is Hero's e.v.

Either way, assuming you've put Villain on the correct range of hands, Hero shows a profit by continuing.

Thus Hero should call Villain's turn bet.

If Hero raises,
0.4104*5-0.5996*3=+0.2542 big bets is Hero's e.v.

As you can see, Hero does best by keeping the betting to a minimum, but calling to the showdown. (That's on the basis of your simulation).

Buzz

she doesn't limp two card hands, she limps four card hands. that's why I typed in: "15%-75%", meaning hands that are not in the top 15% (because she didn't raise) and not in the bottom 25% (because she didn't fold).

I looked at the situation again and believe I made a mistake in my earlier assessment. I've edited my original post to show the correction.

Buzz

Sorry, I'm new to propokertools syntax, but wasn't your range for villain basically 15-75% range that includes at least one of the two card combos (hh, A2, etc.) in that 15-75% range? So that includes hands like A2xx and AAxx, etc.? I would have assumed she raised any A2xx or AAxx preflop, not just the ones in the top 15%.

Or am I misunderstanding the syntax?

Busted! Obviously I don't always have the suits of blanks, or other minor details, in the HH notes that I write on my phone. I figure it makes for an interesting HH regardless. In this case really interesting; the 4 would be like the situation at the Rio where two HE players showed down the flopped nut flush....


My understanding of the syntax is the same as yours, although it's changed and I'm not very good with the new syntax.

In all seriousness I think she's raising A222 in this spot. In many ways, despite playing O8 five times a week, she shows a stunning lack of fundamental O8 understanding.

[Is anyone else ever limping 8843 (whatever suits, whatever position except the blinds) in a multiway pot in LO8? Maybe I'm the one who can't assess hand strength!]

So I agree we can eliminate A2 and AA here.

Buzz,

You correctly consider effective pot odds - expecting to need to call two big bets to get to showdown.
Also worth considering are implied pot odds - villian's range is more "betable" than hero's hand.
Lastly, in very small pots such as this one, rake is an issue as well.

In spite of my own calculations, I still think that folding is probably correct.

Captain/AKQJ10,

No A2 and no AA, but same results:

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

2,769,160 trials (Exhaustive)

board: 9874

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
AdTd8c4s	41.03%	554,603	1,313,160	116,886	555,470	67,478
(hh,9,T8,T7,65,T6,JT,87,84,74,A3,A5,35,77-KK,44,J8!(AA,A2)):15%-75%	58.97%	1,045,859	1,339,114	116,886	1,435,602	67,478

Why?

1) A2 and AA only make a small part of the range of hands between 15%-75%. many A2 and AA hands are in the top 15%.
2) hero has one A - card removal.
3) (probably should be number 1)

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

446,840 trials (Exhaustive)

board: 9874

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
AdTd8c4s	41.86%	18,374	337,227	11,098	7,632	22,672
A2,AA	58.14%	90,518	98,515	11,098	394,336	22,672

This is a good board for hero's hand in an orphan pot vs a lag we have position on. I'd raise the turn and check lots of rivers. Bet if hero makes a straight or boat obv. I'd also probably bet an A, 2 and possibly 3 river.

Never mind this post -- an experiment in how Google indexes 2+2 threads

tag:flop
tag: maniac
tagKillDefense
#inducingBluff