Try just being less annoying in general

Yet another projection. You can't seem to stop yourself.

Step up and stop projecting in the High stakes PL Omaha sub-forum, as well as, stop hoping that your opponents playing bad is going to save you. You came off badly in this exchange with me. I'm in the High Stake PL Omaha sub-forum proving high quality high stakes recommendations. You should put the shovel down and stop digging a deeper and deep hole for yourself coming at me with your insecure projections.

I'm guessing the people reading the High Stakes PL Omaha sub-forum want more SPR content and less projections. There are over 70 different sub-forums on 2+2. Maybe you can find a different place for your insecure projections so the rest of us can get back to high quality, in depth PLO discussion in the...High Stakes PL Omaha sub-forum.

I hate so many turns and even a pot raise leaves us with lots to play, I just call here. I want to see an A, K, 7, J and no diamonds.

I'm far less worried about being 3-bet and more worried about shitty turns. We aren't just dodging actual outs, we are dodging potential outs that we have no idea if they got there or not.

Guy here is going to fold when deep after calling after we pot it? Doubtful. If he does, now we still have to beat an all in player who probably has some equity.

Too dynamic of a board to get tangled in now.

TomCollins, I'm glad you brought up the flop all-in player, it made me think of "dry side pots."

Another reason to call the flop and close the action with what I would say is our strong small pot hand, is to keep the side pot empty. V2 might continue to keep things small ball on the turn since currently there is no side pot to fight for. If we can keep V2 in check mode, then we can decide the few turns worth betting which are probably only when we hit a turn full house.

I typed out a long reply and realized you had already read my mind on this.

If description of V2 is accurate, then he's not a player who's going to put himself in the position of call-folding very often.

Even if we're likely to be good on this flop, we're less likely to still be good when the turn arrives.

V2 obviously knows this, and he knows we don't have KK (because we didn't 3-bet pre) so he's got all sorts of options to 3-bet us on the flop (whether or not he's actually got a set), and he can also lead out most of the deck on the turn (whether or not he actually improves).

When my hand is as middling & marginal as this one, I want to deal with trying to resolve V2's inevitable aggression (a) on a smaller, less risky pot (b) when I am able to see more of the board

I have btn and best relative position so folding pre was not a consideration. Keeping the side pot dry to avoid getting bluffed is definitely part of the consideration. I was still torn on what to do. Clearly if we raise its to fold to a reraise.

Result: I called, turn 2x, he bet 200, I folded and he won with JJ82dd

Don't really want to beat a dead horse but not raising is a clear error - it is super likely our 2p is ahead and we want to charge villain for hands exactly like what he had. Mostly weak 1p (including pairs between k and 7) and/or diamond draw.

The difficulty of turn play (in position) has been greatly exaggerated. K72 is a dry texture. Diamonds we can mostly check back. We can bet almost anything else relatively safely, though we can choose a few cards for balance. For example certain hearts and also maybe a card like the 8 and q, where villain can put us in some trickier spots.

Villain should fold the exact hand he had to a raise, and we are printing if he calls with it


We can also assume villain is a somewhat bad player, good players don't see a flop with that hand - its terrible.

Finally as played, its not clear we should fold when villain leads the 2x - we should be ahead often, and can both improve or turn our hand into a bluff.

Everything you posted has valid points. You aren't beating a dead horse. This thread was Camp Call versus Camp Raise just like every other thread of discussing several options.

As Camp Call, I'm justified in calling BULLCRAP if someone in Camp Raise suggests Raise-Fold, which you did. No one on earth is actually going to Raise-Fold with top two pair. And that is where this thread went sideways. And also as Camp Call I'll say that you only came back, to a thread you said you were done posting in, after the posted results to post a results-oriented "see that why we raise." That is a weak one-two teddy. In this thread for some reason you decided to double-down and now triple-down on silliness. Since, you are one of the best posters on here, it is important someone call you out on it. I'd hate to see you fall into some bullcrap style of posting.

Back to the hand, when it comes to topics on this sub-forum there are a few that gets so little in depth discussion that many don't know the ins and outs, especially if they mostly play online where the max buy-in is often 100bb. The technical part of playing SPR > 13 is that it is played a hell of a lot tighter than most people on here are use to. It is difficult getting the deep threads correct.

This is the 33rd post of this thread and only one poster has used the term SPR when discussing how this hand should be played.

OmahaDonk, there are a fair amount of deep threads on this sub-forum, but even the deep threads aren’t usually SPR > 13. I’ll give you a non-bullcrap, non-results oriented take on how to play this hand at SPR > 13.

First I have to repeat a concept I already posted. SPR > 13 has some features that Pot Limit Omaha players often overlook. In No Limit Hold’em you can bet your whole stack anytime you want. But in Pot Limit Omaha, the pot limit nature of the game limits you to only a pot sized bet. For example, you are playing PLO, you get to the flop heads-up and bet pot (SPR 1), then on turn you bet pot again (SPR 4) and then on the river you bet pot again (SPR 13). In a heads-up pot, all one person can do is make a total of three bets. In a heads-up pot, SPR 13 is the maximum someone can accomplish on their own. In a heads-up pot on the flop the only way that more than SPR 13 (four+ bets) can end up in the pot is if someone raises. If the flop SPR is greater than 13 you damn sure better have a super strong hand to be betting because you’ve put yourself at a lot of risk.

All you have to do is remember that progression of SPR 1, SPR 4 and SPR 13. If you call the flop a street is now gone and all the V2 can do alone is now get it up to an SPR 4. Well look at that, this is the SPR quote from Jeff Hwang’s Advanced Pot Limit Omaha, Volume 1

2. If you have a strong small pot hand (like a bare nut straight, middle or bottom set, the underfull, undertrips, or top two pair), the default play is to smooth call a bet if the SPR > 13 (a high-SPR situation and big-play territory), but shove all-in if the SPR ≤ 4 (a low-SPR situation and shove-or-fold territory).

You have to read between the lines there a bit and understand that top two pair isn’t too good at SPR > 13, but is fine at SPR 4. By calling the flop you have created a cap that V2 can create on his own of SPR 4. Your hand transformed from risky on the flop to acceptable on the turn simply by you only calling the flop. It isn’t magic, it is POT CONTROL. And not only is it pot control it is SPR control.

If I am reading this correct you said a 2 came on the turn. The board is now Kd7d2h2. A lowly 2 hit the turn. Okay. If you were ahead on the flop and now behind it is because V2 has AA or a 2. Shall we weigh the likeliness of AA versus 2? Well AA would have raised preflop. So if you were ahead on the flop and now behind it is only possible if V2 has a 2. Only children are results-oriented. I’m not going to waste my time on the likelihood of V2 having a 2. What is more likely is V2 had a K and now has two pairs KK22, but your KK77 is better. YOUR FOLD ON THE TURN WAS BAD. Your turn fold with two pairs is bad when this hand can only go to SPR 4. Your two pairs fold is bad because many players think their KK22 is good, but you have the hidden higher two pairs KK77.

This thread started of with poster after poster (besides me) saying raise your two pairs. They were right if the SPR was 4, but wrong if the SPR > 13. But the trick is you can make those posters all kind of right by calling the flop. By calling the flop, you cap V2 into only being able to make this a SPR 4 hand from that point onward.

You should have called the turn bet. And you should have called most river bets with your two pairs. Two pairs is a good hand on most boards when it is only costing you a total of SPR 4 postflop. And if you boat up, you bet/raise your full houses.

I highly recommend figuring out how to manipulate the SPR if you want to play deep enough that the SPR > 13.

Anyone posting some results-oriented bullcrap should be disregarded.

Raise-fold line is based on the assumption that in a live game xr (or in this case, call tiny donk bet + raise) is like 80%+sets, though agressive players are more likely to have 1p+diamonds (this should still mostly be nut flush draw with 7/2 or connected kxxx some board interaction with a good flush draw) and all 2p combos.

And xr is arguable even stronger since competent, agressive villain should raise good kkxx combos or even limpr-raise, instead of xc.

I agree raise-fold is more questionable from a GTO standpoint than exploitative, crush bad players viewpoint.

My personal style for live games is probably a little unique though, as i am willing to lose some value on flop + turn with smaller bets from good value handa to mantain more balance/agression and capitalize on reads.