PLO 2/2 9-handed (live, timed rake)

Just my 2nd time playing PLO live. I've played a decent amount online on SWC Poker but a lot of those sessions were short-handed. And live play is often very difference from online.

Around 450 eff.

UTG+1 limps. He’s tighter than average, which means he's probably still pretty loose. This table was pretty loose passive pre with many hands going 4-way or more.

I pot to 10 in the LJ with Ah Th As 6s.

CO calls and BB calls. They are both loose.

Flop ($42): Qd Jh 5c

UTG+1 donks for 35. He’s passive post-flop so he probably has a strong hand here.

Okay to overcall here with gutshot and bd nut flush draw?

I really can't call a repot and there are 2 people left to act behind me. But the gutshot is to the nut straight and Ace might be live just as a set because I have a Ten blocker to broadway.

What would you do?

I'm calling as you are deep enough to call. You also have back door hearts in addition to your gutshot and AA. If someone pots behind I'm dumping.

Best to fold imo. Normally at least 1 k dead all ready and we can't call a squeeze.

We also get freerolled/chopped sometimes when we hit.

It doesn't seem like you should be obligated to defend here facing a near PSB with 3 other players seeing the flop, in a low stakes game, especially being OOP to 2 more players yet to act. You probably get a terrible price on the turn even if you pick up a heart draw, and we'll show up with better draws/hands here. It should be fine to play relatively straight forward here and fold.

You wouldn't be overcalling, that's when someone's called already and you call behind. Cold-calling refers to when there's a bet and a raise and you've put in neither of them and call both. In this situation you're just calling.

Having two aces and a ten weights everyone's ranges towards made hands, meaning you're more likely to be up against a set or two pair from the bettor; if either of the guys behind you have a wrap, they're only likely to raise if they have it with top pair, and even then they might just call, which is not good for you as even though it improves your odds, you split the pot when you hit.

The board being rainbow also means that the straight draw is the only draw, which means you're going to have less implied odds too.

The difference between being last to act in this scenario and first to act with two guys behind you is enough to make the difference between a call and a fold.

Thanks for the replies. Based on them, it looks like folding is best.

But maybe calling is correct in the future because this is what happened in the hand.

I call, CO folds, and BB calls.

Turn ($147): Qd Jh 5c Kh

UTG+1 cbets for 50. I pot to 300. BB calls. UTG+1 folds.

River ($797): Qd Jh 5c Kh 3d

I go all-in for around 105. BB folds and flips over QQ.

The reason I called is that I thought there was a good chance that CO and BB missed the flop because they are loose.

Turns out BB had top set. Fortunately, he made the really bad play of just overcalling with the nuts and nut draw LOL ��

I will definitely try to get in hands with him since he was insanely passive.

Thanks for the accurate definition!

Yup, definitely should ignore well-reasoned advice based on results from a single hand. That is definitely how you get stronger at poker.

Not closing the action in PLO is such an important concept , there are just too many times it get repotted behind you to call this flop.

"Obligated to call" sounds more suited to this same hand in GTOland... Well, some replica of GTOland where pots go four ways. In 2-2 I'm more interested in exploring my opponents' tendencies even at the cost of my own vulnerabilities.

I'd consider it marginal either way if the game/players behind are passive postflop because you can confidently fold to a raise behind. But really your equity is weak, your IO aren't terrific, and relative position has you in a bad spot so folding is probably right.

Definitely fold if it's a wild game or you expect those players to be aggressive with less than nut hands.

I think you're agreeing with me by disagreeing with me here? I'm clearly arguing against worrying about having to continue here even if theory we have to do it sometime. We shouldn't be worrying about being exploited in such a marginal spot. That combined with the fact that we're more likely to under realize equity due to people repotting, being out of position to 2 of the players, we really need to hit on the turn along with a non-pairing river, and end up drawing to chops without redraws, lollivelowstakes, etc.

But OP seems to have decided in advance that none of this matters because they got paid, so we're really both 100% wrong.

Imagine thinking that your reasoning matters when you can just be 100% results oriented instead. He got paid, you wouldn't have, end of story /s