Don't agree with this, but if true it is a reason to bet half pot, not full pot, since it means you can bluff with impunity and get folds unless the villain has the nuts. Then when you get unlucky and he actually has it, you have lost fewer chips.

@ Allin - yea I agree with all that. The perfect play is dictated by villain and situation and your reads are gonna be better than ours. I wish people would stop being so polite with the hand replayer though and show the poker aliases. A finnish player you say. LAG you say. I know a few of those

Really it depends what your objective is and the history between hero and villain, does it not?

Are we trying to put together the perfect quali lap, extracting the absolute maximum performance from the car and to hell with reliability? Or are we near the end of the grand prix, trying to manage fuel and tyres, knowing that if we don't squeeze what we have too hard, we have an almost guaranteed podium finish?

I think in this case we are near the end of the race, one villain car looks bullet proof, two villain cars looks like they have reliability issues and we are almost in a straight fight with CO for HU.

Under these circumstances at the FT, I don't care so much if I leave a couple seconds lap-time on the table, as long as doing that means I bring the car home.

Earlier in the tourney, I don't mind trying to extract maximum performance, taking a few risks and getting near the front. I get rewarded in many ways if I am successful, lose little if I crash early.

Being overly passive or trying to get overly cute pre and post can cost your tourney life.

I always love deceptive play. The c/r is my fav move in all of poker. But sometimes discretion is most definitely the better part of valour and being a nit will generally mean ICM is on your side.

Anyways, I think OP had full discretion to play this hand any which way. OP could lead flop min/half-pot/pot. Check flop, c/r. OP could check all the way to river and shove, OP could flat every bet, lead or c/r any street. I just happen to prefer the safest possible play at this stage of the grand prix, for my own personal reasons. If OP's objective was solely to win or OP was already happy with 5th, ya know, any which way is good, villain was still gonna quarter hero.

I'm confused. You are saying mddgfc ain't a good mtt or PL player? Geezus man that's like madonna telling the pope he ain't a good catholic. Since when did you concern yourself with bet sizing anyway? If it wasn't PL, you would shove pre there, 5-handed, like 99.9%?????

no what I am saying is mddgfc has a tendency to just bet pot a majority of the time when betting.

If you want to play me some hu plo8 cash we can set that up on full tilt and Ill show you all kinds of different bet sizing.

If this helps at all:

SB was Stuubakuula - do not recall playing with him before
CO was SJanowski55- don't recall playing with him before, but he's in Mexico, so likely a US pro... he went on to win the tourney

UTG (CL) was XoTime- know him as a reg
BTN was HnumTheGreat- know him as a Russian fairly donkish reg

I knew it wasn't going to be easy with CL sitting directly to my left, which made the prospect of being solidly in 2nd (whether SB folds on turn or calls with less than necessary equity when I have the made hand) very enticing. I was primarily targeting the Finn and known Russian, but they had typical donk luck.

If he's truly bad and will stack off with a naked kq or worse, then the turn is an easy raise. Assuming he is bad, I wouldn't really weight him toward the NLD, and lots of players will bet/fold KQ, or worse two pairs here (he could still have a set), BUT they will pay you off on the river with those same hands if a non-flush low card comes.

So, if raising knocks out hands we crush and only get calls from sets, the only reason to raise is to knock out an A2 (which he doesn't have to hold). I could entertain the idea of a min-raise, the more I think about it. Puts the other guy in a tough spot if he's sitting on A2, since the action isn't closed, but keeps our target in the pot.

But do your opponents know this? Betting the flop seems bad, unless you knew the PFR was checking back 100%.

Maybe we should look at it from SB's perspective.

He didn't lead OTF. Why not? He had TPTK, NFD, and 4th BDLD. Was he expecting CO to c-bet and intended to c/r? Given that he led an unimproved turn, he seemed to think his TPTK was good, and once I put him nearly AI, he may have supsected he was behind, but probably figured he had outs to justify his call on an equity basis.

It seems like many are worried that the PSR OTT will fold SB out, but again:

A) Folding him out isn't such a bad thing, as I would take down pot and go from 3rd (close to 2nd) to comfortably in 2nd and need only one big pot w/ CL to take a commanding lead, instead of not even having half of CL's stack. Also remember there was a player to act.

B) Because SB was perceived as a weak player, he was more likely to make a bad call, because that's what donks do. I didn't think he led OTT w/ air, just because he checked behind, because he 1) called raise from SB, which was unusual, 2) paused unusually long OTF, and 3) led OTT into 2 opponents. It was unlikely, but possible, that I was behind OTT, but if so, I still had outs (4 K/Q's left, diamonds, 2nd NLD)... but except the 4 K/Q's (and having led OTT, good chance SB has one or other and probably another draw... much less likely he has low set), my outs are non-nut, which means on the river I have to not only catch the out, but decide whether I'm good, and if I am, get paid off.

I face the possibility of having to call a still significant amount (if I min raise, CO folds, and SB calls, pot is 110k and SB has ~65k behind) when a scare card comes... and there's a lot of scare cards left (out of 44 cards, there were 9 non-d 4/5/6's that complete str8... 11 non-d A/J/T/9 that complete str8... 7 d's that don't give me NL... plus Ad which gives me NF, unless he holds JTd for RF... and 5 non-d 3/7's which could give him trips). So that's 23 or 24 scare cards out of 44, where hero may either pay off better hand or fold better hand. I don't see the advantage in that, in addition to not pricing out draws such as NFD, NLD, wrap, etc., with 2 opponents to act. My only worry is that he has a low set, which I highly doubted, but in which case I have tons of definite and probably outs as well. The last thing I wanted was for both players to be there on the river, with combinations of wraps, NFD, and NLD and so many potentially difficult cards.

There are only 8 cards that give me a guaranteed piece of the pot: 2 Ks, 2 Qs, 4 2s. There is likely to be more guesswork on my part than villain's, so why not put him to the test OTT?

It's the flop which is most difficult. I was playing pretty tight, and CO being solid probably knew SB was pretty donkish as well. So I figured when it was checked around to him, there was ~50/50 chance he would c-bet, which would be opportunity to try to gii OTF. I can see why some think not betting OTF was a mistake, and they may be right.

This x10000.... if i wasnt too lazy to write out long winded responses, this is what it would have been.

This hand is pretty much a cooler five handed this shallow imo. From sb's perspective he was probably going for a check/raise, or should have been. The original raiser should be c-betting frequently on this board. I would check my whole range here close to 100% of the time, unless I was 1/4 pot bluffing against scared players that don't pay attention.

I don't like the turn logic of taking what's in the pot and running. If you bust this guy you are going to win the tournament. Don't let him off that easy. You can do a lot more damage. The most important part of the hand to me is how lightly he defends his sb in this spot or how he sizes his bets on this type of board when he is leading out, and how often. But if you HONESTLY think he's likely to stack off light then I like raising.

You give a lot of credit to a player you thought was bad. I don't think worrying about him playing perfectly OOP, and bluffing every scare card is productive. We should be worrying about punishing him for the maximum. Its Omaha, there are always going to be bad rivers. Think about all the times HE gets put in horrible spots on the river.

I have noticed that, particularly in Omania games from utg, pot-raise seems to be the way to go for him. I think he's been playing well recently, he's being going deep in most of the mtts we have been playing anyway. Whatever works I guess.

As for your kind offer, it would almost be worth it to see you do something other than shove/fold pre.

spoiler alert, he isnt playing well and he never is. He is just lucky he plays a game where the fish are still horrible. Any half decent reg should salivate when he comes to the table because he is so explotable by anyone with half a brain. But he is still a winner in low-midstakes o8 because people are terrible. I honestly have no idea how he sells action for anything other than that because hes horrific at NLHE and PLO.

Someone's jealous.

dacus drinking the hate aid lol

although I agree whole heartedly ha

mddgfc does not ever change his game so plsssss. The w/e works for him comment reminds me of your 'bet sizing doesn't matter' comment

Some of what you say I agree with.

I think you have to make a judgment call OTF on the info you have whether he will c-bet or not. So really it's hard to say whether it should be a lead or check raise because optimal plays vary But bear in mind you defo want action OTF so for me i'm looking at the best way to get the most $ in versus an OR that has been active which would often mean either chk/raising small or leading small hopefully to induce as much action as possible OTF and keep hands in that we want to keep in. You want to give aggro/bad plays/whoever the chance to spew.

It isn't terrible potting turn and folding out hands but i'd say it's not optimal when your folding out hands you want in and could have maximised profit for the hand. Obv there is often ICM factors too but I think in this case you want to maximise what you can get from SB. potting flop or turn doesn't do that.

potting is so overused in PL as the allin button is in NL8 I guess.

I've seen a few posters here (jia comes to mind) diss mddgfc. I don't really see what the problem is. I think his record lately is good, I believe out of the last 20 MTTs we've both been in, he has cashed almost all and made many FTs. Obv his historical record is decent too. I have him rated purple, same as u haha. Maybe u guys have been on the wrong end of tilting moments, I dunno. Only criticism I have is that he can zone in and out of games so I find him easier than most to steal from. Also in one game I saw him pot raise utg 7-8 times in half an hour. Few hands later he does the same, I re-raise just over min and Gii OTF with him holding middle pair and 2nd nut low (obv I'm a nit and only play AA2X). I rarely play PLO or see him in holdem. I know he bum and prob script hunts in cash games, witnessed a few hit n runs, but he is literally in EVERY mtt running when playing, so he isn't just playing fish. Perhaps free rolling has corrupted him and in some games he couldn't give 2 ****s, just wants to meet his quota and leave.

@allin - XoTime I rate as a good reg. Hnum I know well and think is competent. Other 2 I don't know so well. I would imagine XO being fairly nitty and hnum being LAG.

That's what I thought, and one reason I reluctantly checked.
Given my tight table image and SB's donkish image, after we checked, I thought he would c-bet

He wasn't defending his SB much at all.
Jis main tactics were to min-raise with anything from BTN, then c-bet that... and to generally play poorly post-flop.

I definitely expected him to stack off light, so saw no reason to get fancy OTT, once he initiated action, and esp. with another player to act.

My intention wasn't to fold out SB, but I wouldn't mind that either, that was my point.
I felt he had the easier hand to play (NLD, NFD or wrap all easier than my hand), would be first to act, and that there was more chance for him to make mistake in calling PSR OTT than on river.

I don't give him credit generally, but I gave him credit for a pretty good hand here, because he defended SB (very unusual) and led OTT.

I did punish him to the maximum, he gii bad OTT and sucked out. That was what I was trying to prevent, a suckout that put me in a tough spot on the river, where I either folded part/all of pot or paid off a better hand thinking I had part of pot.

To me, raise-sizing OTT is splitting hairs. If I made a real mistake in this hand, it would be checking OTF.

What's there to be jealous of? I can play whatever I want, and I'm actually profitable in the stuff :-p

Haha yea, I just see no need to sugar coat things... I tend to just say it how it is. For the most part I have the results that would dictate I know what I am talking about haha (this is why I only comment on mtt stuff)

That's a tough spot, given that my diamonds are 2nd nut, mainly because he would be playing a hand from SB with PF raiser, then leading into 2 opponents OTF. Despite his generally poor play, I have to respect that he must have some kind of hand there, and so I may not be far ahead (as it turns out he did, and I wasn't far ahead OTF). If he has a wrap + nut dd, or a set (despite my blockers), then I'm behind, but otherwise I'm ahead.

My gut says, despite his lead and a player to act behind, that this is good spot to gii, esp. given his donkish play. ICM probably says differently, so it's not an easy decision IMO. How can I fold when I hit the flop so hard? I don't think I can, esp. not against a donk (if he leads, and I hit so hard, chances are CO didn't hit and is going to fold regardless... which was also part of my rationale OTT). What does calling do, except bring lot of scare cards for him to possibly donk bluff or actually have? (again part of my thinking OTT). So I think my only choice is to raise, and if you're going to raise, why not have FE and avoid further potential mistakes due to the probable less playable hand I hold, if his also hit that hand hard (once again, part of turn decision).

I agree.

What I don't think gets much consideration, surprisingly, is ICM.

If I lead and get called OTF, then like you say, the turn is often going to be a tough spot. So now I have more chips committed and a tougher decision if he leads a scare card OTT. At that point, he's called PF raise from SB, called a non-cbet flop bet into 2 opponents, from OOP, and led a scare card OTT. Seems like, despite his donkish play, that I have to give that due respect. OTOH, he may be bluffing. So I can either fold a decent, as ICM might suggest, and in doing so go from nearly tied for 2nd (28 BB vs. 29 for CO) to 4th, ~5-7 BB behind 3rd. That's a huge difference in ICM equity.

By checking OTF, I got more information from CO (confirmation he very likely didn't hit flop). I also avoided giving my opponents the information that my hand was very strong. Finally, it allowed SB to give yet more information by leading the turn and indicating he too probably had at least a somewhat strong hand. So, at this point I'm already basically considering it a HU pot, although the fact that CO was PF raiser and is yet to act on a board which has two low cards must be considered. And considered it was, as rather than face the possibility that one or both had one or combos of A2** (esp. A23 or A27... and even A34 or A47), AJT9 (or any 3 of the 4), or nut diamonds... and face a very difficult decision on many, if not most rivers, esp. given the situation, I thought it better to gii good while I could and either take the pot without another card (moving into 2nd, with 40% more than 3rd) or force him into the mistake of calling with a worse hand and/or relatively poor draw. At worst, he has a set, and I still have outs. That seems better than paying off with worse or folding a better hand OTR.