Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register

02-08-2025 , 01:52 PM
Up until I moved recently, I dealt a game out of my home where bomb pots were in high demand. To randomize the button position, I picked a target frequency for bomb pots and then identified an event that happened at about that rate. For us, it was 1 in 20 hands, which is about the frequency of monotone (single-suit) flops for games that see a flop almost every hand (e.g. my game).

My players loved this. They would all hope for and celebrate a monotone flop. Players would make bad preflop calls just to give the table a shot at a bomb pot.

It even provided some good branding: the occurrence of a monotone flop at other home games would inevitably have someone say "that's a bomb pot at [albedoa's] game" A free mention every 20 flops or so!
Quote
02-08-2025 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by albedoa
Up until I moved recently, I dealt a game out of my home where bomb pots were in high demand. To randomize the button position, I picked a target frequency for bomb pots and then identified an event that happened at about that rate. For us, it was 1 in 20 hands, which is about the frequency of monotone (single-suit) flops for games that see a flop almost every hand (e.g. my game).

My players loved this. They would all hope for and celebrate a monotone flop. Players would make bad preflop calls just to give the table a shot at a bomb pot.

It even provided some good branding: the occurrence of a monotone flop at other home games would inevitably have someone say "that's a bomb pot at [albedoa's] game" A free mention every 20 flops or so!
Very funny and inventive, I like it

When I play at Kings (depending on line-up, not everyone likes BP), we do one BP on dealer change, and then the BP button moves counterclockwise to the next player, and then we do another BP when the BP button crosses with the normal button
Quote
02-08-2025 , 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javanewt
I find the opposite. People check bomb pots all the time w/ the nuts or bet w/ worse than the nuts. Having position is better than not, but nowhere near as important as in a regular hand. It just plain isn't -- single board and especially double board.

Having position just doesn't give you a big advantage compared to having position in a regular hand -- and not to be rude, but if you don't understand that, then you haven't played enough bomb pots
Agree and disagree. It depends on the player type, but generally, a big bet on a bomb pot is generally 2-pair+.

However, for the less experienced players, I've found that strength and weakness tells weigh much more heavily than usual.
Quote
02-09-2025 , 12:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerbros_Player
guys, i really don't wanna be rude or anything, but i'm convinced you're dead wrong on the position thing ... there's so many situations (especially in BP), where the fact that you are last to act is so big ... be it to be able to easier extract value, or, when you have a lock on one side and are not sure about the other ... when you are OOP, in the same situation, that sucks. In position you clearly know (bc the guy OOP would have bet with a lock on one side, he'd never check) ... and so on and so on. so many examples
No one suggested that position isn’t an advantage in a BP. Just position value is less in BP.

You allude to one situation, lock on a board, but guess what that is rare when you will be both btn and flop a lock. And if you don’t think EP will flop trap in BP, esp with a board lock, you have not played enough.

A major aspect of position is taking advantage of those who limp call to wide pre flop. That happens exactly 0% of the time inBP

Basically every post flop position advantage is available in both normal and BP, although there are differences, but BP have none of the preflop positional advantages. You just cant stop those preflop auto fold hands frim realizing full equity when they happen to flop a monster.

So sure, I always prefer to be in position but you need to proceed with lots of caution for the vast majority of time you don’t flop a lock because with so many players seeing the flop, someone flopped a monster if not the stone lock. In some way position in BP is like pocket aces. It can help you win lots of smaller pots but with out caution you can lose the huge ones.
Quote
02-09-2025 , 02:31 AM
I can you give you a million examples for the opposite, and even the one you mentioned (punishing limpers in normal hands) can be interpreted very differently.

One last attempt:
Let’s say, you have the exact same hand, and your opponent too, with all the extra difficulties that come in a bombpot … and you play it twice, with positions reversed … where do you think you make more money and where do you lose less? ��

But anyways, I will force myself to be open to the idea that I could be wrong … so I can bring Peace to the (2+2) universe ��
Quote
02-09-2025 , 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerbros_Player
I can you give you a million examples for the opposite, and even the one you mentioned (punishing limpers in normal hands) can be interpreted very differently.

One last attempt:
Let’s say, you have the exact same hand, and your opponent too, with all the extra difficulties that come in a bombpot … and you play it twice, with positions reversed … where do you think you make more money and where do you lose less? ��

But anyways, I will force myself to be open to the idea that I could be wrong … so I can bring Peace to the (2+2) universe ��
You keep coming back to the ‘in position is better in BP, so position more important than in non BP’ claim. But that is a non sequitur argument. I and others have repeatedly said that yes position is important in BP. No one has said otherwise. But let’s look at your current example, ofc with the same hands, position in BP will have advantage. But so what. Same thing is true in a non BP. With the same hand in non BP, player in position.

If you mean to play it in BP and non BP, yes the BP is likely going to win more. But that is not due to position. That is due to BP are inherently bloated preflop, esp single board BP. That is it isn’t position that wins you more, it is that the pot is bloated and most folks don’t play bloated pots as often so they play them less well regardless of their position

Either was if you know how to adjust to the game position is little less valuable in BP. Let me try one other explanation. Normal pot you get 4 chances to use you position advantage. In a BP this is 3 chances. BP would need to have 33% more advantage on each of those chances to be equally valuable across the entire hand.
Quote
02-10-2025 , 08:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fore
You keep coming back to the ‘in position is better in BP, so position more important than in non BP’ claim. But that is a non sequitur argument. I and others have repeatedly said that yes position is important in BP. No one has said otherwise. But let’s look at your current example, ofc with the same hands, position in BP will have advantage. But so what. Same thing is true in a non BP. With the same hand in non BP, player in position.

If you mean to play it in BP and non BP, yes the BP is likely going to win more. But that is not due to position. That is due to BP are inherently bloated preflop, esp single board BP. That is it isn’t position that wins you more, it is that the pot is bloated and most folks don’t play bloated pots as often so they play them less well regardless of their position

Either was if you know how to adjust to the game position is little less valuable in BP. Let me try one other explanation. Normal pot you get 4 chances to use you position advantage. In a BP this is 3 chances. BP would need to have 33% more advantage on each of those chances to be equally valuable across the entire hand.
I think this is right.

Obviously position is better. Regular poker or bomb pot. No doubt. The question is position more important in regular poker or bomb pots. I have never thought about it in those terms before. So initially I am leaning to agreeing with you, but I am open to arguments both ways.

But even still, I think all of that is besides the point. It is my limited experience that the skill level in bomb pots among the general poker public is so bad that IN GENERAL, bomb pots are worth it, even out of position simply because the skill level is so bad (and the pots so big). Obviously there are games that are exceptions, but in general I think bomb pots induce a lot of mistakes for a lot of money.

Position matters, but skill also matters. I have seen far too many players call lots of money with good, but non-nut draws on one board (maybe a 3 card straight wrap on a board that also has a flush draw) and absolutely nothing on the other board.
Quote
02-10-2025 , 08:07 AM
That said, I also think that at a table full of decent regs, I think aggressively semi bluffing with ok, but weak 2nd board hands might be a viable strategy. Many regs will play strong fit or fold and end up folding too much. They are (maybe rightly) looking only to play big pots with great hands against bad players that they overfold everything else. I don't play enough in these games to confirm this, but as a dealer that is the feeling I get.
Quote
02-13-2025 , 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by answer20
3) Use the inner Stud part of your brain and take a look at both Boards. Obv those cards can no longer help you ..... You also have to consider that your cards may block the others from improving, which may come into play if you have position to bluff some Rivers in very passively played pots.

4) Once again your Board reading skills are needed to determine what combinations of cards could beat you on both Boards while you try to get to the next street.
Came back to 2+2 looking to learn how you guys talk about bomb pots. Most of my posts are 15+ years ago, my poker lingo is a little rusty. I still play live now & then. In a live NLHE bomb pot last night, facing a big all-in river bet, the two boards were:

3 Q95K
2 6 K J 3

I held QT

Almost instantly I realized I had a lock on half the pot. With the K on the board, and holding the Queen-high flush, I knew that if I lost to the nuts on my flush board, then a pair of queens had to be good on the other board.

Question is, how do you guys talk about this, what's the terminology? From what I remember about stud/variants with exposed cards, I was calling this a 'board lock,' which jives with what I've quoted from an earlier post. But most of the newer theory stuff I see (granted, not much, just youtube videos) geared to NLHE talks about blockers, so maybe that's the way nomenclature has evolved over 20 years. Or maybe there's a more specific way of talking about a situation like this?
Quote
02-13-2025 , 11:43 AM
Interesting. You block a scoop!

I think you have used the available terms for this situation: you have locked exactly one board, you just don't know which. Your hand is best on a minimum of half the boards.
Quote
02-13-2025 , 04:06 PM
It's a more general term applied to other similar but not related situations, but we could also say that you were "free rolling" since at worst you would split.
Quote
02-13-2025 , 07:29 PM
I'd say you have at least one board locked up.

Free-rolling is different to me. It's when you have the nuts vs. someone who also has the nuts, but you have draws to bigger nuts.

Free-rolling in a bomb pot, you'd have the nuts (and/or the above) on one board with draws to the nuts on the other -- or similar. This hand does not have that
Quote
02-13-2025 , 11:43 PM
I know where you come from, but I apply "freeroll" more generally where you're sure to at least split and have a chance to scoop.
Quote
Yesterday , 01:29 AM
This situation rarely comes up, because most bomb pots are 4 or 5 card Omaha, not Holdem.
Quote

      
m