Live hand here (I'm assuming most hands here are OL). Casino game with 500 max bet.

Hero, white 40's male. Playing nitty, but on a heater. Bought in for 2000 and ran it up to 7000. Actually somewhat scared money in this game, usually play 5/5 or 2/2/5. Table prolly knows that since H not usually seen at this game of regs.

V, white early 30's male. Playing nitty, and was short-stacking about 1000 for a while. Ran it up recently to 3500ish.

7 handed, two limps to H in CO.

H (AJ77) limps. Should H fold this? It was late and table was getting limpy in this normally somewhat aggressive game (I think).

V limps OTB.
SB1 and SB2 fold.
BB checks.

Flop (140) J89
checks to V who bets 100

At first I'm thinking just play this for the flush draw, but most of the bets at the table had been pot, so I think 100 is weak and I can get V to fold, maybe.

H raises to 400.
C calls.

Turn (840) J89, 4
Hero ?

I think this is borderline pre if you know you can see the flop for cheap it might be worth it but the problem with it is exactly the spot we end up in. We hit a good flop for our hand but we still end in difficult situations.

I think you just need to barrel $500 and expect a fold 85% of the time. I hate to give free cards to a set and you might get paid by another flush.

Perhaps folding the flop is to be considered. There are a bunch of people who can still raise and you really don't have that many outs. Pre is borderline but I think you are slightly right to call.

Checking the turn would be the right play if your opponent has a straight - and both QT and T7 are possible here. It would be bad if your opponent has two pair or set or flush, unless the flush is baby. Actually it's not that bad if he has a flush, or maybe if he has just a flush. You really shouldn't be raising the nut flush draw here unless it's with a set or a straight, since why would you expose yourself to a punishing 3 bet with a mehish or even good draw? So your hand is a little disguised at least.

pre is ok in that position

if you barrel 500 here your hand is pretty transparent imo

i might go for something like 350 and hope he comes over the top thinking youre trying to protect a straight

I agree with this. I don't like sizing a bet smaller than our raise on the flop though.
I think it will be tough to get any more out of anyone who has less than a Q/K high flush or someone with a set. Unless we are up against a drooler

They play this at CAZ or Is this Seattle?

This is Seattle. Felt v could have a straight or flush ott. How to get Max value against a flush and protect against a set? Also, does v continue with combo draw like two pair and wrap.

H checks to c/r. V bets 270. H raises to 770. V folds. Missed value? I don't think so. I think I got Max vallue by checking turn.

The max bet is $500? Why would that game even run? So when the pot is $2000 otr you are still only allowed to bet $500? LOL and the other dude can only raise to $1000?

Haha why do people play this?

if you are going to chk, chkraising is really dumb

you got max value by x/r flop and hitting nf ott

I'm listening. I thought he could have set (combo raise by him) or straight (super thin value by him) or lower flush going for thin value. I can't tell which he has, so I raise (protecting against a set, and value (prolly get a fold) against a straight, might get a call from K/Q high as said above). Is that bad?

It's the biggest game around. It's a Washington state law.

But yes, it does change the game a lot. Each pot starts as PLO and gradually converts to limit as the pot grows. Strange game, and prolly most don't adjust properly. Not saying I do, but my theory is that it actually compresses the high end range on an absolute hand strength basis. For example, I think in this game, it makes more sense to go all the way (only 500 per street if you're heads up and check) with the second or third nuts, e.g., underfull, than it does in a true PLO game.

Sorry for the offtopic questions but for a Euro guy this is kinda funny. So if I get it right, the state made a law that says you can only bet a maximum of $500 in a single action?

What's the rationale behind it? Or was it originally made for other types of gambling?

Ivanoe, I don't know the history, etc. I've always assumed it's a random way to limit gamboling. Like you can blow your rent as easily this way. Kinda silly, as it really just effects the massive games, and does almost nothing at 1/3, where people actually blow their rent. But what do I know?

A similar restriction applies at casinos in Sweden. Maxbet is somewhere close to 13 000 usd. Rule originally intended to restrict max bets on blackjack and roulette and so on. Then people realized it applied to ALL games in the casino lol.

Pre is fine, you can't just play premium hands. And based on what you have described, the game had been playing passively pre, which is good! We can leverage our skill advantage post-flop!

As for the flop raise, it's interesting...I don't hate it. I kinda like it. It gives you the opportunity to win the pot right there and then. I doubt many hands - even the stone cold nuts - are going to raise in that spot, unless they have a good redraw. Esp. on that board where it's easy to have flopped the world.

I could be wrong in that assumption, but if that's right then there's a smaller percentage where you are getting raised, which means the rest of the time you either win or have control of the pot and can make better decisions for the rest of the hand.

The turn question is trivial, it's a bet and it's not even close. Are you ever betting here as a bluff? Answer: "Yes, I am," and if you're not, you're not bluffing enough. The more interesting question is just how much to bet. That depends on your V tendencies, table dynamics and your perceived reputation, how you've played past hands, past bluffs, etc.

Any of the following could be done: betting pot, betting 3/4, betting 2/3.

I was probably never betting there as a bluff, as I said, I was scared money. Now I'm opening up my game some. Now I would bet turn as a bluff and for value.