Why not?

Because the equities run so close I'd think you'd rather win the blinds than give someone an easy defense with a hand like JT63. And this certainly isn't common at all in NLHE or PLO cash games in my experience. Again, this is not a game I play, so I was just wondering if it was somehow standard in PLO8, and if so, why?

What site do you play on?

It is pretty common for players to open between 2-2.5x in all big bet games these days.

I only play live. 2-2.5x is pretty standard in tournaments, but very rare in cash games.

Live cash tends to be played with deeper stacks compared to online. Not many players raise to 3x+ online unless stack sizes are deeper at least on Pokerstars anyway which is where these hands were played.

Well, simply that I don't really understand why you say you would "never" bet this flop that's all.

If he has KJ or KK on that flop you are crushed already right? So if you bet the flop you are announcing a Jxxx hand and he'll probably raise you and you'll be able to see he has his boat and that you are beaten. At minimum he'll hit you hard on the turn and you can fold then. I don't think people slowplay big hands very often (especially when you had position) at all since there are so many times you start out ahead and if you try to get too tricky you get outdrawn and lose.

So you landed trips on the flop, you are probably ahead, but don't you want to make someone with a drawing hand pay to get another card? Plus see if anyone else has a Jxxx hand except you? Since you are out of position on the flop, by not betting you are risking everyone with a drawing hand getting a free card on the turn. You may be able to take the pot down right then.

I mean, on the flop if he had the perfect drawing hand of (say) A2(d)Q10 giving him both a nut flush draw AND a straight draw, you still have 58% equity on the flop. Don't you want to protect that and make him pay to continue if he has a hand like that? You are only focusing on the KJ/KK hands cause of how it played out.

But what about hands like A9(d)10Q or AA3Q (w a diamond draw) that he would love to see develop? You would still have about 57-60% equity on that flop against those sorts of hands even if they BOTH had one.

Shouldn't you protect that? That's my thinking anyway, but I'm happy to listen to yours.

Also, if you HAD bet the flop, thereby representing the Jxxx hand, do you think the hand would have played the same? You would have got a fold from the CO right then at least allowing you to continue against Vandir in position right?

Because I never would. Because I don't think you need a leading range in this spot.

Right

I don't think it's good to announce a hand like that. Why can't he/they raise as a bluff?

OK. Things like this are exactly why I called some of your previous arguments "dilettantish" and why I have a hard time believing you have played these guys in cash a lot. However, people do seem to think in different ways.

If my equity is higher than villain's, yes it is good for me when we put money in. If CO has a big draw, he will bet it very often. If SB has a big draw, he will bet blank turns very often. I don't really see why leading the flop would make that big of a difference.

Of course, on the river talk should focus on KJ/KK/bluff.

I am happy to put money in against those hands. Worst case scenario is that the flop gets checked through with Hero having something like 60% equity. Protecting hands is good, but it is not everything.

Like I said earlier, you don't seem fully understand the consequences of having a lead range on the flop.

• we take cbet away from CO (bad for us when we have a hand)
• in the long run, we need to be at least somewhat "balanced" i.e we can't just bet trips in such spots
• our check-range is severely weakened, which makes it harder to continue after check

If I do something different, it will not play the same.

Likely yes, but that is results-oriented. When checking, I had no idea if CO would cbet or not and so on.

For me, pondering how this exact hand would have played out had I bet the flop is moot. I know that this is difficult to understand for many people.

I can guarantee that I understand what you are saying, so you don't need to waste your time trying to re-explain it. I do "get it", but I don't agree with many of your points, because your thinking seems to revolve around protecting equity, while my thinking revolves around ranges.

To avoid any misunderstanding, I mean that I would never bet this flop with this pre-flop action with ~these stacks.

Regarding "... guess things and base actions around guesses."

this is very interesting. Can I ask... Where is the flaw in doing this?

TYTYTY

35-130BB? What's the problem there? It's not like you are 400BB deep HU with Kuhns or Exit or something. Who is the button? Horny Animal? Isn't that just a standard game?

I guess we play it differently then, but I kind of think hoping for a C-Bet from the CO so you can check behind with trips or something is more Texas Holdem thinking than Omaha (for me). And I am sure your thinking is based on ranges, whereas mine is based on "What is Vandir doing?" Sirens and OnMyBike will play it differently than Horny Animal or Last Partizan, and Vandir is somewhere in the middle. If it was Horny Animal, you'd be calling that river bet every day of the week. Sirens, you'd fold the turn.


Anyway, I'm not trying to make you irritated, so I'll leave you to it and best of luck at the tables.

Let's say +30bb deep, shallower than that I would give some thought to leading with some hands. The "problem" is that I find it unnecessary and for me, it creates more issues than it solves (ones that I've mentioned in post #82).

CO is omybike I think. Note that I didn't mention who it is, because I don't think it matters. Maybe if it was a player with some obvious leaks (like always calling down with AA, but checking it behind on the flop) I should consider betting.

It is not checking behind. Checking behind is when you check last to act. I do not know if it is Texas Holdem thinking, but it is a form of poker I have not played much. Obviously I have played PLO a lot.

Of course who the villain is matters, especially on later streets in this hand.

You are not making me irritated. GL.

Isn't it quite self-evident? When you guess what your opponent has, based on a "read" that you think you have, you are not always going to nail it and will end up sometimes making bad plays.

The weaker your opposition is, the more you can get away with such guessing games, because they have leaks that sometimes indeed gives their hand away. Also against weak opposition you don't have to worry so much about giving your hand away, as they simply aren't efficient enough in hand-reading. You can exploit them, but they are not going to exploit you (much).

Against stronger opposition you must worry a bit more about your patterns, thus you should think more in terms of ranges. They are not going to do stuff that gives their hand away, so guessing is not only moot, but it will often lead you to the wrong direction.

Note also that I'm talking about online play, in live you have so much more information before your eyes and even decent players can have significant physical tells. Online, even some decent players have tells in timing or sizing though.

TY amok