Hi All. Here is a hand from today I played on zoom, followed by some comments and questions:

Stacks:
UTG ($12.97)
UTG+1 ($21.63)
eldodo (CO) ($10.15)
BTN ($2.85)
SB ($10.13)
BB ($12.08)

Pre-Flop: ($0.15, 6 players) eldodo is CO 9 K K J
1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $0.35, eldodo calls $0.35, 3 folds

Flop: 7 9 K ($0.85, 2 players)
UTG+1 checks, eldodo bets $0.56, UTG+1 calls $0.56

Turn: 10 ($1.97, 2 players)
UTG+1 bets $1.40, eldodo --- ?

Questions:

1. I should 3bet pre, right? I thought of these as bad kings, but now when I look at them they're pretty decent.

1. How is my bet sizing on the flop? Should I just pot it?

1. On the turn do we call, or raise? (Folding seems meh.) I briefly considered raising, both for value in case he didn't actually get there, or as a semibluff/cheap-showdown in case he has one of the three non-nut straights. Does anyone raise here?

1. Finally, if we do call on the turn, what is our plan on a blank river (say 3)? What size bet do we call, if any?

Thanks!

1. Please 3bet pre.

2. OK betsizing imho: it's harder for the opps to hit this flop as it's quite dry and you're holding blockers. Plus if there are regs at the table, you should use the same sizing for valuebets and bluffs (dependent on flop texture), lowering cbet sizes makes your bluffs cheaper. But of course if everyone else at the table is ultrafishy, feel free to pot nuts.

3&4. 8-6 are much more frequent in his range than QJT, KQJ, TT, KT (think what he could call the flop with), so bluffraising is senseless. I'd call now (due to 16 outs to fulls, quads, better straights) and fold to any bets (say, bigger than 1/5 potsize) on blank rivers.

Ep v ep in zoom calling is fine imo.
Snap turn & fold to all but the smallest bets as **** said.

Edit: lol it beepd out ****, lmfao.

Thanks for the responses. Yeah, river was a total brick, villain potted and I folded. I guess that's Omaha .

coon74: thanks for the reply. Regarding 3&4: the reason I asked about bluff-raising the turn is exactly because 8-6 are much more frequent in his range than QJ, and because QJ is typically in my range, so villain calling turn and river without the nuts would be spew on his part. On the other hand, trying to get people to fold the non-nut straight in PLO10 seems to be, well, not the best strategy, probably.

LOL at server censoring "the other c-word". Has it been used in a derogatory way in the last 50 years? But then again, us Europeans aren't necessarily sensitive enough to the social contexts of those words: I learned a long time ago not to presume to tell Americans what they should or should not be offended by.

Yes, I learned this the hard way!

Haha, reminds of this scene from curb, VERY nsfw (especially if you're living in America I guess! )

Lol at me being He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named I'm not Afro so it's not offensive at all.

Thx Envoy222 for the video that told me the term I thought was missing in English.

As for the turn play, I think nobody with showdown value will fold to your raise - you're repping nothing. I.e., from my view it's smarter to flat with both QJ and sets than to raise both. In addition, if I were a reg (in UTG+1), I wouldn't lead any straight by any means here because it turns the hand face up and otherwise at least one bet is expected from the flop aggressor. Which kinda hints that we're facing a fish.

I consider myself a decent PLO player, and if I happened to play the flop this way (which is questionable)l, and if I have a straight draw, then I totally lead the turn here, and in fact I lead the turn on most, or even all, board-straightening cards, whether I hit or not. This causes CO to make mistakes: either he calls when he's behind, or folds when he's ahead: this is a great bet to make in terms of Galfond dollars. By the way, CO happens to be at the top of his non-straight range, but CO folds lots of good hands here because he knows that if he chooses to bluff-catch the turn, he'll often have to keep bluff-catching the river. Furthermore, I think that game-theoretically, leading out is totally the right thing for UTG+1 to do here, assuming he's on a straight draw (regardless of whether he hit or not); Note, by the way, that CO should not bet this turn card when it's checked to him (IMO, at least; I don't bet the turn here), and that when CO checks behind, UTG+1 loses a street of value and/or a street to bluff in. The more streets to bluff in, the better his effective equity. This is all standard game-theory of poker, IMO. Things get a bit complicated since a straight is also in CO's range, but still I think I still lead out here as UTG+1 on this card, regardless of whether my straight draw hit or not; if I get raised, I have some hard decisions to make (almost surely fold). In fact, the hand that I am most likely to check on the turn is the bottom straight, because if I get raised I'm miserable. This fits the general philosophy of betting with the top of your range, and with some of the bottom of your continuing range, and play more slowly with middling hands.


Ummmm, that's why it's offensive. It would not be offensive if you were Afro. I mean, it's not offensive to me in either case, buy y'know

I know I said I won't complain about American political-correctness, but you're tempting me here! I'm meditterenian, and we don't care much about PC. That brings about huge bouts of racist speech, I won't deny, and I admire the sentiments and meaning behind the American model, but jeez, I find it so obnoxious that there are "forbidden words", and new ones become forbidden every day (also see this).

Forbidden words are stupid. Context is all important.
Eg, you're a good ****! Or **** you, you ****. One is good, one is bad, both because of context!
Lol, what a word in that wiki!